You don't like the new edition? Tell me about it!

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I always get confused when I read things like this. I always played the class I wanted to play. I never bothered to see if it fit into the game first, I found a way to fit it into the game. Am I an anomoly? I can't be the only one who played like this.

Paizo Adventure Paths & Dungeon adventures: By now, I play the class we need. Even if it is a Cleric, which I hate playing.

Homebrew campaign: I'd play what I like, knowing the DM will adjust.

But that doesn't change that playing a Fighter in a high-intrigue campaign is boring. I can barely contribute to anything. And as a Rogue in a undead-heavy, combat focused campaign? Great, I can pick some locks. At least, until the Fighter has bought his Admantite Greataxe...

It's not just the choice that matters, it's also that I should be guaranteed to have fun. This doesn't have to mean "Damage per Second" or "Diplomancing the King", but it should mean "I made a difference." (for the better )

 

[Raven Crowking]

I always get confused when I read things like this. I always played the class I wanted to play. I never bothered to see if it fit into the game first, I found a way to fit it into the game. Am I an anomoly? I can't be the only one who played like this.

You are not.

 

[Storm Raven]

It's not just the choice that matters, it's also that I should be guaranteed to have fun. This doesn't have to mean "Damage per Second" or "Diplomancing the King", but it should mean "I made a difference." (for the better )

That's pretty much a question of DMing though, isn't it? I mean, if you play a social skill heavy rogue and the DM includes zero opportunities to use social skills, that's not really the fault of the system. It seems that the authors of 4e simply decided that the only element that matters is how quickly a character can bash heads - and the rest just doesn't matter at all.

That, to me, just creates a game that seems very limited in scope.

 

[Raven Crowking]

That's pretty much a question of DMing though, isn't it? I mean, if you play a social skill heavy rogue and the DM includes zero opportunities to use social skills, that's not really the fault of the system. It seems that the authors of 4e simply decided that the only element that matters is how quickly a character can bash heads - and the rest just doesn't matter at all.

That, to me, just creates a game that seems very limited in scope.

There is no possible way that even I can argue with Storm Raven on this one.

RC

 

[krissbeth]

There are so many reasons that have already been outlined, but my main reason for sticking with older editions and not looking back is:

4E doesn't offer the types of characters I like to play. That makes it decidedly Not Fun (*gasp*). It's all so generic. The lack of creativity kind of makes me go "ick" at the whole thing.

 

[mhensley]

1) Every class looks EXACTLY the same. There are all just sets of powers. The Player's Handbook reads like the Advanced Squad Leader rule-book, but without the humor and soul.

This is absolutely spot on. 4e's solution for class balance is like communism- everyone is equally poor.

 

[billd91]

But that doesn't change that playing a Fighter in a high-intrigue campaign is boring. I can barely contribute to anything.

Depends on how often the social-interaction dice hit the table. If they don't come out very often, then you can contribute as much as anyone else because general RP contribution doesn't require any dice or mechanics at all.
Looking at 4e, your options (as far as rolling for skill checks) aren't all that much better when it comes to being the heavy lifter. The DC system is geared toward making you fail an untrained skill check 75% of the time. Granted, aid another is pretty much gravy since it's one of the few DCs that don't seem to scale with level, but it's not that hard in 3e either.
I applaud 4e for giving the fighter another trained skill and a decent social skill option. I also think the readily-available feats to pick up additional skills are a good idea. But the skill DC system is still stacked against you. Fail to take Streetwise and don't put any feats into other cross class skills (quite reasonable decisions) and you're still behind the curve for level-appropriate challenges.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

That's pretty much a question of DMing though, isn't it? I mean, if you play a social skill heavy rogue and the DM includes zero opportunities to use social skills, that's not really the fault of the system. It seems that the authors of 4e simply decided that the only element that matters is how quickly a character can bash heads - and the rest just doesn't matter at all.

That, to me, just creates a game that seems very limited in scope.

It can also be a fault of the DM, if he doesn't take into account that class A is good at combat but sucks outside it, and class B is bad at combat but shines outside of it.

But if the game ensures that class A and class B can contribute equally (but differently) both in and outside combat, this looks like one headache for the DM less.

Depends on how often the social-interaction dice hit the table. If they don't come out very often, then you can contribute as much as anyone else because general RP contribution doesn't require any dice or mechanics at all.

I don't see it as "good role-playing" is my charisma 8 Fighter is constantly engaged in general role-playing and relating to other people, or if an INT 8 Barbarian comes up with a good strategy to unravel the cultists conspiracy.
It might bel fun, it might be problem-solving, but it is decidedly not playing my role.

 

[Felon]

3) The over-use of the word fun. It's a game, we wouldn't be playing it if it wasn't fun. It becomes obnoxious after a point and starts to sound like they are trying to convince themselves.

I'll see your overuse of "fun" in the books and raise you an overuse of the word "cool" in the web articles.

What gripes my bottom about their talk of fun is that they really seem to believe they can speak of it in an objective manner. Their definition seems to emphasize a sizable attention deficiency. Thinking, planning, and caution are all synonyms for "unfun". They don't know what's fun for me.

 

[Felon]

I always get confused when I read things like this. I always played the class I wanted to play. I never bothered to see if it fit into the game first, I found a way to fit it into the game. Am I an anomoly? I can't be the only one who played like this.

Well, it can be kind of selfish to not even consdier the contribution your character will make to the group; the group may simply not need another rogue, for instance, so no matter how hard you try to find a way to fit in, playing one might mean that you don't earn your keep.