Why won't you switch?

[Pinotage]

Primarily it seems everyone is stating money as an issue. I have to agree this is even an issue for me as I'm not exactly rich. Finding the money to put in an order will be a challenge but then I didn't invest too much in 3.x so I'm probably not losing as much as others either.

At present I'm on the fence about 4e. It'll no doubt have things I'll grow to like, although at present those seem far and few between. Despite this, I'm giving it a benefit of the doubt and will make a final decision when the product is released. I'm by no means enthused or excited about it, so it's really a 'meh' thing for me. I see what it's like when it comes out, but there hasn't been the greatest vibe about the whole thing, probably because of the division between those who like it and those who don't.

Anyhow, to come back to the point, you raise an important issue. A lot of people, like myself, have invested a lot in 3.5e, a system that there's nothing really wrong with. People have been playing it for many years. Money for the conversion is not so much an issue as - why switch from a system that's good and still got years of playing material? And, as others have mentioned, convincing a whole group of players to switch is even harder.

Pinotage

 

[Cadfan]

... nor do I have a problem with grapple... ...Things like this feel like "changes for the sake of change."

I respect people's right to like the 3e grapple rules, and to not want them changed. But when a great many people have been clamoring quite vocally for a very long time about wanting a change to a particular rule, it is not fair to refer to changes to that rule as "changes for the sake of change." It can be "changes I don't like," or even "changes I don't think YOU will like once you really get a chance to use them," but what it is NOT is "changes for the sake of change."

 

[Arnwyn]

It seems that there are a vast majority of people who have very similar ideas on what makes a good system and what they dislike about 3.x. And 4E seems to be catering to that by fixing everything most people seem to dislike and making it into what most people think is a good system.

So, with that said, and admittedly I think I'm turning into a fanboi due to my excitement and anticipation of the new edition, I find it puzzling why anyone would not want to switch.

And there's your problem. "Most", "vast majority", fixing "everything" are terms that probably won't get you very far. That might certainly contribute to your "puzzlement".

Therefore I bring this question to you: why won't you switch?

Some of our reasons, since you did ask the question:

- My players aren't interested in "learning a new system", and they refuse to purchase any new books. Regardless of any other reasons, it puts the kibosh on everything right there.

- For us, the fluff sucks. Bad. Every single bit of it.

- While a lot of the mechanics look pretty good (IMO; my players are far less generous), there are some assumptions as to what is and is not "fun" that we do not agree with. (For example, we really like the resource management aspect of the game, among other things.) We're definitely at a "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" situation for our particular group.

- Finally, for me, personally: I no longer have the time nowadays to make the necessary rules conversion for our long-running campaign. Conversions are no longer in the cards due to my 'life situation'. (This also relates to item 2, above.)

 

[Raven Crowking]

Other people have given many of my reasons, but here's one I haven't seen come up yet:

If I'm having fun doing something, switching is not my default position. I will switch if given sufficient reason to switch. WotC hasn't given me sufficient reason to switch.

On top of that:

(1) Move away from OGL. I think that the OGL provided the most innovative 3e products. I will not pay for a new, non-OGL version of the game.

(2) The Flavour Sucks. I know that this is a subjective position, but it is mine. Some bits of flavour I quite like. On the whole, though, blech!

(3) Assumptions about fun. I like Vancian magic. I like resource magic. I like verisimilitude. The farther the game moves from those things, the farther it moves from me.

(4) WotC Policies. There are some recent WotC policies, including those leading to the Gleemax/WotC site TOU, the non-OGL nature of 4e, and the misleading or contentless advertising re 4e, that I simply cannot support. In a capitalistic society, you vote with your wallet, and saying No to 4e is the clearest message I can send about how WotC seems to currently view its relationship with gamers.

There are many good things about 4e (or, at least there are if the system does what WotC claims it will do). But, IMHO, the negatives of the four points outlined above outweigh the good by a considerable amount. As I believe firmly that switching should be something you do only if you are strongly pulled to do so, I don't intend on switching.

RC

 

[Agamon]

My problem isn't mentioned much, though it's not really unique to me. I won't be switching in the event of some earth-shattering cataclysmic event happening before June. Or if I die before then, I guess. Otherwise, I'm willing to weather the storm.

 

[Agamon]

I won't be switching right away because I want to finish running Age of Worms (and we are currently only on the second adventure).

If I knew then what I know now (we're at the 2nd last adventure, right now), I'd be looking forward to June...this high level stuff blows (that said, everything up to and including The Prince of Redhand was fun).

 

[DrakkenKaiser]

There are a few reasons why I'm avoiding the change-over to 4e...

1. Money. Everyone else has said it, and I'll say it too. Not really a lot to expound on that hasn't been elsewhere. I was fortunate with the switch to 3.5 that my local game store offered credit towards the 3.5 books if you traded in your 3.0 books. I seriously doubt they're going to do this again.

2. Peer Pressure. Nobody else that I game with is going to adopt to 4e unless it's truly something special. A few are going to pick up the PHB at some point, and usually follow up that statement with a "just in case someone else is running it." I'd probably be in the same camp if it weren't for reason #1.

3. There Are No RPG Police. Wizards is not going to come kick in my door if I keep playing 3.5 and send me packing. This isn't like some shareware that bombs out after 30 hours of use, and it's kind of silly for them to treat it like software when they can't conceivably enforce it as thus, or depend on the newest update of Windows or MacOS to kind of force people to upgrade... it's not like I will need to buy new dice to play 4e, right?

4. Other Games. There are a lot of other games out there. A lot of good games, too. OGL allowed for an enormous explosion of material, and the companies that have solidified themselves a position produce some real quality stuff without the same expense that it sounds like 4e is going to require. I have this funny feeling you're going to see some of these companies switch to their own in-house system.

5. But is it Fluffy? This is kind of minor icing on the cake after contemplating everything above, but... I don't really like the direction they're taking the fluff. For years, little has changed, and now suddenly it's necessary to alter their existing worlds and cosmologies completely? Is this because of 4e, marketing, or a real need for change? I'm not sure.

 

[atom crash]

I do not plan to play 4E at the launch. My gaming group has been playing in a continous campaign for the past few years -- it's often slow going with a group of working 30-something professionals with other time constraints, including one player with a kid and another couple planning a wedding -- and we intend to finish that campaign.

The WotC previews have showed me some things about 4E I don't like (the Marketing mantra chimes in "don't worry, things are still in flux and could change before the final version hits the shelves") and some things I do like (my inner cynic chimes in here "but again, things are still in flux and could change before the final version hits the shelves"), but the designers have pretty much explicitly said not to bother trying to convert my 3E game to 4E. So I won't.

I intend to pick up a PHB when it comes out and read it thoroughly to see if the new edition is for me. That's what I did with 3E as well. I was pretty much against switching to 3E -- "why should I change systems when I'm still having fun with the 1E books I own plus my house rules?" I remember asking -- until I got a copy of the PHB for Christmas and read it. Six months later I found a group and I've been playing 3E/d20 ever since.

In the meantime, I'm importing the fluff I like from the previews into my 3E game and continuing to tinker with house ruling approximate mechanics -- fewer skills and second winds, for example.

I'm not against 4E on principle. And I know far too little about the game mechanics to know if I'll think it's as cool and fun as the designers want me to believe. I am dissatisfied with the marketing surrounding 4E and I'm beginning to feel I've bought more gaming books than I'll ever need, so I doubt I buy into the entire system and all the future source books, but I'll probably pick up the first 3 books eventually.

 

[Doug McCrae]

This isn't like some shareware that bombs out after 30 hours of use, and it's kind of silly for them to treat it like software when they can't conceivably enforce it as thus

Oh can't they my friend? You just wait until June. All I'm saying is you might want to be in a different room from your D&D collection.

The explosive charge is small but quite powerful.

 

[Kzach]

1. To switch over to 3.0 and 3.5, I had to announce to the group we were changing, purchase everyone (9 players plus myself) Players Handbooks, and do all conversions. I choose not to invest that kind of time or money a third time.

They made you buy them all new books?

I'd find new players instead...