Yes to 4th edition

[Sejs]

You know, it sure would be nice to see a 4e thread that was something other than a thinly-veiled gripe about the wrongs of the current system.

There's nothing to indicate the new edition will be worse than 3rd edition - and it certainly can't get a whole lot worse than 3.5 lets face it.

You know, like that.



Let's see some positive 4e threads, dagummit!

 

[Sound of Azure]

As an Australian from Queensland, I'll just be happy to refer to "4.X".

</lame joke>

 

[trancejeremy]

Never played 2e, did ya?

Well, by the way he talks about the 4 archetypes, I would guess he's a fan of 2e, which basically did things that way.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

The Evil Genius Strikes!

Well...

I love the current D20 system, but if they changed things around for 4Ed, I'd like to see it done in a way that will insure a constant income stream for WotC (or whomever holds the D&D license at that time).

Thus:

The DMG would be the Core book. Campaign setting books would look much the same.

The MM would be released in the same form as the 2Ed Monsterous compendium...but with a twist: Monsters would be released in packages of 30 pages each, containing a variety of monsters. And by variety, I mean COLLECTIBLE! That's right! Monsters would be released randomly with distribution determined by their ACTUAL rarity!

The PHB would recieve similar treatment, with all of the crunchy stuff the players would need- grapple rules, AoO rules, etc.- but with seperate binders dedicated to collectible Spells, Psionic Powers, Feats...even CLASSES & RACES!

"Oh...you want to play a Halfling Rogue? Awwwwww- I don't have that class...or race! Here- try a Feral Duskling Spellthief instead!"

BWAH-HA-HA-HA-HAAAAAAAAAAAA!

See? It CAN get worse!

 

[Nyaricus]

Danny, that was a great faux-troll. Almost beat the real one in the first post

 

[Li Shenron]

I agree with you on this, but I think 3.x needs more time before hitting the reset button.

The truth about this is very different between the design point of view and the marketing point of view. Erm

 

[dwetzel]

Oh, I was primed for 4e almost as soon as 3e came out. But I was hoping for the opposite of what they're talking about. I have always thought that 3e leans too far in the direction of a board/mini game. I was hoping 4e would bring it back the other way.

Looks like I'm out voted.

Maybe there's good in this though. Maybe enough RPG'ers will be pissed off that the current dominance of d20 will be broken and we'll have room for some new ideas again.

I just wish that if they intend to go this route they stop calling it an rpg.

btw, I have nothing against board/mini games. I play them too. It's just a different sort of game.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

Actually in many ways, 2e was a step up from 1e. All the combat matrices were unified into a a simple Thac0 score (yes, Thac0 was a lot simpler than the the system that came before it.) And many of the rules were unified. The problem came later in the form of the hundreds of kits introduced in the splatbooks.

Thac0 was not a 2e innovation.

 

[Allandaros]

C'mon 2E! Rise again!!!

*sighs when he realizes nobody else is cheering with him*

 

[reanjr]

The problem came later in the form of the hundreds of kits introduced in the splatbooks.

Wow. That sounds familiar...

I have to raise my voice as another one who liked 2e better than 1e. Name levels? Come on...