Why WILL you switch?

[hong]

If rousetastic is a word, would its opposite be arousetastic?

 

[Dragonblade]

I'm switching because they are fixing pretty much everything I ever disliked about 3e D&D, and doing a bunch of stuff that I think is just darn cool. Such as:

No more level drain
No more multi-classing penalties
Multi-classing that works (i.e. multi-classed characters that don't end up sucking at both classes)
Per encounter powers
At will powers (Wizards no longer need crossbows)
All classes equally balanced at all levels with cool stuff to do every level
Removal or editing of game breaking effects like Scry (Though I haven't seen details yet)
No XP cost for magic items
Wands that boost a caster's magical attack roll (I love the Harry Potter feel of this)
NPC/Monster guidelines that flat out tell me what their stats should like at a given level. No more building things up by adding levels or monster hit dice (i.e. No more DM homework)
Consistency and uniformity in character level, spell/power level, monster level, magic item level
No more Vancian magic
New death and dying rules
Epic included in core
Retraining rules in core (i.e. no more need to plan character advancement from 1-30 in advance)
SW Saga style skills
Saves as Defenses
Reduced magic item dependence

However, its not all roses and sunshine. A few things I dislike based on what I've heard and may dislike in 4e depending on how they are implemented:

Level based action points - I dislike them in Eberron and in SW Saga. The whole notion of a character resource that I "use or lose" before gaining my next level really rubs me the wrong way.

Character advancement abruptly ending at level 30 - I understand that the game gets wonky once numeric bonuses exceed a certain number. We saw that with 3e and epic levels. I'm ok with it if the retraining rules can still apply to a level 30 character such that the character can continue to evolve in some way even if their numeric bonuses stop advancing. But I hate systems where your character reaches a point and just stops. Frozen forever. Even worse if character advancement ceases but yet something like action points still depend on level advancement to be refreshed. I absolutely DESPISE how this happens in SW Saga. So, if a level 20 Jedi uses up all their force points, then they are just stuck forever with no possible way of ever regaining them except for DM fiat?? That's crap. Yes, I know there is a talent or Force Technique that lets you recover force points but what if you don't take that? Its still crap.

No refresh mechanic for per encounter powers - I'd prefer it if per encounter powers did have some sort of in combat refresh even if its something like a full round action to recover one power. But I'll withhold judgement until I see the system as a whole. As a side note to this, I hope that they don't arbitrarily rule that power encounter powers cannot be used outside of combat. They should build and balance the game with the assumption that out of combat, per encounter powers essentially become at will powers.

 

[Zinovia]

Good word. I'm going to start using that one.

Personally I like "Mearlicious"

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

1. Cool powers
2. Cool per encounter powers
3. Cool per encounter powers for all classes
4. More explicit underlying math
5. Easier to houserule because of the more explicit underlying math
6. Underlying math that (I expect) will give most characters a nontrivial chance of success and a nontrivial chance of failure.
7. Generalization of key functions, e.g. anyone can heal, anyone can deal with traps
8. Rules that allow the player to act even if the character does not, e.g. saving throws to remove ongoing effects
9. More focused classes - less baggage picked up if you just want a specific ability
10. More flexible characters - better able to mix and match various classes and abilities to get the character you want

Mostly sums it up for me. Although I might elaborate on #5: I'm looking forward to simple and quick monster and NPC design. Perhaps even "on-the-fly" design, once I get my head around the rules.

 

[Jack99]

I've kept all my books from all editions (basic through 3rd).

It's nice for reference:

'See; this was a particularly crap edition…'

Tell me about it, I sold $5000 worth of 2e stuff about a month before 3e came out. Even though the money was nice, I do wish I had kept all them books. Which is why I won't make the same mistake again

Cheers

 

[Zinovia]

Mostly I've enjoyed 3.5, but there are legacy issues that I have had trouble with, as well as mechanics that just don't seem to work as intended.

• Vancian spellcasting.
• Monsters that are time-consuming to prepare and hard to utilize. Our DM is smart, but forgets to use monster feats all the time. He's the improvisational type, not the hours of prep type.
• SoD spells and level-drains.
• Why am I playing a rogue when a wizard gets you all that and a bag of chips?
• Prestige Classes; narrowly defined campaign-specific fluff, or rules-breaking munchkinism? You decide!
• Use Rope skill. What's with that? Bondage R Us.
• Challenge Ratings - they never worked right.
• So many skills, so little skill points!
• AC and attack damage only goes up through itemization.
• Too much dependence on a cleric, who gets to run around healing every turn
• Iterative attacks and the AoO penalties discourage movement in combat. Why move when you'd give up 3 swings by doing so?
• Metamagic feats. Great idea, stupid implementation. "I foresee that I will need an increased range on my fireball spell later this afternoon, so I will memorize it that way in place of a more powerful spell". House-ruled right off the bat.
• XP cost for magic-item creation.
• Multi-classing gimps spell-casters.
• High level melee characters are weak compared to high level clerics, wizards, druids and sorcerers.

There are probably other issues, but I'll leave it there. I'm hoping that 4E will fix some of those while still maintaining the flexibility to have characters of the same class not be clones of each other.

 

[Quantarum]

The main factor for me is the ridiculous amount of material in 3.5 I had to restrict or ban. I have one player who can find unbalanced feats and classes like a bloodhound, and with every new book he'd find several somethings that fit under the "omg did they even play test this" category. Having to rewrite the house rules every other month is depressing. Trying to acclimate a new player to this is trying. An rpg rule set is like a language, if everyone speaks the same dialect things run so much smoother. I want 4E to be the game where the only tinkering I do with the rules is to add something new, not fix some poorly thought out feat/class/power. That's what I believe 4E will be, and that's why I'm switching.

-Q.

 

[kennew142]

I started with OD&D (white box) in 1978, then moved to AD&D in 1980. I played (and ran) 2e intermittently, but flirted with HERO, Runequest and GURPS for most of the 1990s. I even spent some time on the convention circuit running demos of GURPS (it's how I got anout 1/4 of my collection). 3e brought me back to D&D full time. It seemed to fix so many problems I had with earlier editions. I didn't think too much about the over-crunchiness of the rules at the time (I was coming from GURPS after all), but I had begun to feel oppressed by the mechanics of 3e witin the last few years.

I was considering running a heavily houseruled version of basic D&D (which I had read and played, but never run), when the 4e announcement came out. I was angry at first, but then checked out Bo9S and SWSE (and I HATE all things Star Wars!). I fell in love with what appears to be direction of 4e. I have liked most of the fluff we've seen and almost all of the mechanics. The only real exception has been the level limit on rings (although I may ignore that) and the 1-1-1-1 diagonals. We're going to give that one a try for a while in our various games and see how it plays out.

My group is definitely going to 4e.

1) We like the feel and what we've seen of the mechanics.

2) We want to teach our children the newest version of the game so that they will be more likely to be able to play with their friends.

3) We have grown very dissatisfied with 3e, especially with high level play.

4) We go to a lot of conventions and want to be able to run/play easily.

5) As fate would have it, all but one of our many D&D 3e campaign were reaching a natural concluding point at the same time. Most will be done before 4e comes out; the remainder shortly thereafter.

 

[WhimsyTheFae]

My main reason to switch would be that the Pros outweigh the Cons. If the Pros continue to maintain the lead, I will be inclined to switch to 4e (so far, it's been a back-and-forth battle, but the Pros are ahead at the moment).

I get a bit tunnel-visioned with regards to game systems, though, which makes it difficult for me to run more than one system. If my SWSE games are still fun, I may have to let 4e slide for a while.

 

[JVisgaitis]

I'll play whichever game turns out to be the most fun. I won't know how 4e qualifies until I try it, of course, so we'll put it through its paces and see how it feels. Based on the opinions of people I trust, I expect to be favorbly impressed.

Ditto. (Yeah, I'm lazy.)