D&D 4E Why I'm so excited for 4E!!

[OchreJelly]

I prefer core only in my games for two reasons. One, it means I only have to haul three books and my notebook to the game. Two, it keeps the rules pretty simple, while at the same time allowing for a surprising range of options. I'd much prefer to see WotC go the route of fewer rules and more modules or settings, although I udnerstand why that isn't feasible money-wise.

I think one of the elephants in the room is that we actually have seen all of 4E's combat rules. Well, at least we are 90% there I think. All of the other "rules" come from character powers which we haven't seen beyond level 1 for the most part. Personally I would like the combat section as lean as possible with little to no subsystems aside from a universal resolution mechanic (i.e. ability vs. defense/DC).

Incidently, have you ever hauled the Ptolus book around? That's a workout!

 

[vagabundo]

I think one of the elephants in the room is that we actually have seen all of 4E's combat rules. Well, at least we are 90% there I think. All of the other "rules" come from character powers which we haven't seen beyond level 1 for the most part. Personally I would like the combat section as lean as possible with little to no subsystems aside from a universal resolution mechanic (i.e. ability vs. defense/DC).

Incidently, have you ever hauled the Ptolus book around? That's a workout!

Lean is what I like. The 4e combat has a nice flow, it allows me to work on flavour and surprises during the encounter. It feels very structured, things happen in a set order. It feels like we get more done, I find doing rulings on the fly easier, I have more interesting challenges I can set for an unusual action. The four defences are a gift.

 

[HP Dreadnought]

We're going to run a "core" game for the first time ever having played since 1st Ed. We've decided to pass on the splat books and just pick up the annual releases instead (PH2, etc.)

I have to agree with the OP that said D&D is cheap as a hobby. I have an EXTENSIVE 3.5 library. . . but it pales in comparison to the thousands and thousands I've spent on miniature wargaming. Just recently dropped a grand on paintball stuff. . . Drop about $100 a weekend going out and enjoying the nightlife. . .

D&D is cheap.

 

[Voss]

They will introduce new classes in "non-core" books, but it's my impression that they are self-contained. As new classes are introduced, new monster supplements will incorporate those classes as NPC listings. I would actually buy a monster manual style book that is nothing but "classed" NPC's across all tiers - a Rogue's Gallery!

Unfortunately, I don't think is going to be the case, as show cased by the Martial Power book blurb- new powers, feats and paths for fighter/ranger/rogue/warlord. I expect to see it with every power source.

So eventually, possibly even within a year or two, the multiple book syndrom hits.
PH I w/ wizard, warlock
FRCS w/ swordmage (and of course, more powers for existing classes here too)
PH II w/ sorcerer
Arcane Power w/ new powers & etc. for wizard, warlock, swordmage and sorcerer
and so on and so forth as the edition wears on.

This is not a release model that makes me happy, personally. I would have rather had completely self contained classes, and new books would only introduce new classes, and 'new powers' for existing characters could have been handled by the class training feat. (So, for example, when the illusionist comes out in PH #whatever, the wizard could take 'major image' through class training), but not release wizard power after wizard power and pretend that they're all balanced.

The truly annoying thing is it contrasts badly with the strict roles thy are pushing on the initial classes... A horde of classes with strict roles can work, but a horde of classes with roles that become looser and looser with every book released just sounds like a disaster in the making.

 

[vagabonvoid]

As a GM, I have ran core-only games, expanded (completes, PHB2, etc...) games, and games with 3rd party books.

Core was unbalanced to begin with... Expanded materials tried to fix that and failed... 3rd party books were anything but balanced...

That said I run mostly core with expanded materials. They try to balance each other out (though not well in some respects).

With 4E coming out, I am hoping that the first core books are balanced well. And with a year in between new core books, that should give them enough time to playtest the expanded rules.

 

[breschau]

It is sad that I have been a GM/DM for 15+ years and as I player I keep hearing DM that I play under say core books only and mean PHB/DMG. It has been 8 years and I have played or DMed for just about every possibility out of the PHB and I want something more. What the heck is the use of all of these other books and classes that WotC puts out if I'm not allowed to use them? So here come 4E to breathe new life into all of the standard classes and take them in different directions. I have great hopes for the new edition and feel that a lot of the things that people worry about are not something that bothered me in the 3E nor will they in 4E. I respect people that say that they are not going to change over but hope that they also realize that their are plenty of players out there like myself that feel that it is time for something new. Also I laugh at the idea that D&D is a money intensive hobby. It is one of the cheapest that I know of unless you are buying books like crazy that is. I have bought about 240 dollars in books over the last 8 years though I have gotten a few more as presents and that comes out to about 2.50 per month oveer that entire time. Seems a small price to pay for a great hobby that bring me and my friends together.

Except those same DMs will still likely say PHI and DMGI are the only books they'll allow. The "core" label only made it easier. We had the same issue back in AD&D with my group. The DM refused to allow Barbarians, Cavaliers, or Acrobats because Unearthed Arcana wasn't "core". Strange thing was, he still allowed the spells.

 

[kennew142]

I've always allowed options beyond the 'core' in my games, with the proviso that each new option had to be closely vetted to see how it worked with all of the other options. Even the so-called core rules were subject to revision if they proved overpowered.

I couldn't have run my four year FR sembia campaign without allowing other options. The characters in the game include telepaths and warlocks, but there are no druids or rangers.

 

[SSquirrel]

Incidently, have you ever hauled the Ptolus book around? That's a workout!

It isn't referred to as The Brick for nothing

When I run games I tend to go thru my books and decide the things I will allow and won't allow. If people want to play something outside of this set of items I read the class and its options over and allow it if I feel it's balanced. That has always seemed to be the reasonable thing to do to not waste people's money and heck, I buy more than the core too, but some of what I buy ends up being material I would not want to see at the table.

 

[Dragonblade]

My group always allows all WotC products. Only 3rd party stuff is vetted. We've never had a problem. We just require that the player who plays something outside of the PHB, must provide a copy of the book containing said new class to the DM for review upon demand.

 

[WheresMyD20]

Except those same DMs will still likely say PHI and DMGI are the only books they'll allow. The "core" label only made it easier. We had the same issue back in AD&D with my group. The DM refused to allow Barbarians, Cavaliers, or Acrobats because Unearthed Arcana wasn't "core". Strange thing was, he still allowed the spells.

I'd say he was a wise man. The common consensus among 1e diehards is that the 1e barbarian, cavalier, and acrobat classes are poorly designed. A lot of 1e DMs won't allow them. Ever wonder why all three of those classes got dropped when 2e came out?