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

[Vyvyan Basterd]

Two things I dislike related to 4E:

1) People labeling new design as "stupid" because it isn't what they are used to and they lack the imagination to explain how it may now work. (e.g. Healing Surges are NOT Regeneration. The designers may have chosen poor terminology, but it is no stretch for me to envision a Healing Surge as that burst of energy heroes get when the going gets tough and allows them to press on when normal people would fall. What's that called again? Oh yeah... a Second Wind.)

2) That the ENWorld moderators haven't merged all of these redundant "What I hate about 4E" threads. Because it's cluttering up the boards and is really just the same people saying the same things over and over and over...

 

[Eldragon]

1) Reducing Cleric/Wizard spell selection. That was the fun part of being a caster; spending hours picking spells!

B) Every Class is pigeonholed. e.g. All Wizards are Controllers. You can't make a Summoner, because you don't have the spells for it

iii) The Subscription model. If you want new pigeon holes to choose from, you will need to buy new books.

b100) Changes to classic D&D fluff. Tieflings as corrupted humans? WTF?

five) Class balance trumps all. D&D isnt a fight club between classes, its an RPG! Wizards are supposed to be able to nuke small villages!

 

[Neil Bishop]

1. The game is incomplete in terms of what I want to use it for (in particular, I hate generic clerics).

2. I prefer DMing in FR (without any of the nonsense from the novels) and I really do not like the design decisions that have been revealed so far for FR4E.

I might reconsider in a year or so once more product has been released but, as it stands, I'm really enthused about my 3.5E games again. If I want lower prep, I'll start using Savage Worlds.

 

[billd91]

Two things I dislike related to 4E:

1) People labeling new design as "stupid" because it isn't what they are used to and they lack the imagination to explain how it may now work. (e.g. Healing Surges are NOT Regeneration. The designers may have chosen poor terminology, but it is no stretch for me to envision a Healing Surge as that burst of energy heroes get when the going gets tough and allows them to press on when normal people would fall. What's that called again? Oh yeah... a Second Wind.)

Second wind, like in SWSE, fine. I actually kind of like it. But enough times a day to recover fully at least 2x your max hit points without any magical assistance? Gimmie a break. It's not lack of imagination that doesn't make that work for some of us.

2) That the ENWorld moderators haven't merged all of these redundant "What I hate about 4E" threads. Because it's cluttering up the boards and is really just the same people saying the same things over and over and over...

For that matter, they haven't merged all of the *GLEE* I LOVE 4e!!1!one! *SQUEE* threads either. Seems fair to me.

 

[Old Gumphrey]

But enough times a day to recover fully at least 2x your max hit points without any magical assistance? Gimmie a break. It's not lack of imagination that doesn't make that work for some of us.

Actually, it sort of is. All that healing sounds stupid at first, until you realize that hit points aren't "life points" anymore. In my experience it's mainly a refusal to accept this that keeps people from playing. Most of my group is anti-4e because LOL EVERYONE HEALZ. Oh, and LOL WARCRAFT, but that's another story.

I'm a competitive (amateur) MMA fighter. When I fight a match, you can bet that I am beaten half to crap and exhausted when I'm finished, win or lose. But could I fight twice more in one day? I probably could. I couldn't do it day after day for weeks and months on end, but it's safe to say that I'd be using my healing surges during the fight and between fights to keep my stamina up when I needed to.

People can't get repeatedly hit with heavy blades anyway. Hit points shouldn't be about wounds, they should be about your ability to not get wounded severely. In 3.x, taking a greatsword hit for 18 didn't mean a greatsword actually chopped your arm to the bone. It might not have even hit you, especially if you had over 100 hp. Hit Points were an abstraction then; they're even more of one now.

It's simply a lack of acceptance of change.

If I've got 20 hit points, and someone cranks me one for 4 damage with a longsword, I didn't necessarily take a hit. But if I have to dodge 5 more blows like that, I'm gonna be so exhausted that the next one puts me in my place, on the ground and bleeding out. That's my take on it anyway. Just gotta use your imagination.

EDIT: *SQUEE* bwahaha

 

[billd91]

Actually, it sort of is. All that healing sounds stupid at first, until you realize that hit points aren't "life points" anymore. In my experience it's mainly a refusal to accept this that keeps people from playing. Most of my group is anti-4e because LOL EVERYONE HEALZ. Oh, and LOL WARCRAFT, but that's another story.

Except that hit points were always pretty abstract (since 1e at least). And even with that, recovering all of that isn't going to work for everyone's sense of the reality they'd like to model.

It might work for me in a 4-color-comic superhero game, I'll give you that.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

1) The overwhelming reason for me not going to 4.0 is simply the amount of 3.5 stuff I have sitting on my shelf. I'd like to run the adventures and use the source books I own.

2) I like the 3.5 rule set. I just haven't experienced the same problems that others seem to have. There are issues, of course. But there will be in any edition - including 4th.

3) WotC marketing. Don't market your new game by telling me that I've been buying a bunch of crap these past years. That's really insulting. Sure, tell me how much better you think the new game will be, but not how much of a schmuck I've been for purchasing the existing one.

4) Fanboyism. Their hat of d02 know no limit. Yawn. Their aggressive and, all too often, childish diatribe against all things 3ed really put me off the new edition. It felt like the target audience for 4ed was much younger than previous editions.

5) The subscription model. It's cynical.

6) The 4ed ruleset just doesn't appeal. It's not fantasy as I like to play it.

This is pretty much exactly me. To expand on (6), I'd fully expected I'd buy the rulebooks and play occasionally, though I had no intention of DMing. But a couple of jaw-droppingly stupid rules -- 1-1-1-1 movement being the first culprit -- changed my mind on that.

I genuinely hope people have a great time with 4E, while my group and I enjoy 3.5 and Pathfinder and True20 for the next several years. Hopefully with 5E, D&D may be D&D again, and maybe it'll bring me back to the fold as 3E did.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

Two things I dislike related to 4E:


2) That the ENWorld moderators haven't merged all of these redundant "What I hate about 4E" threads. Because it's cluttering up the boards and is really just the same people saying the same things over and over and over...

But it's perfectly acceptable to start a 4e roxxors thread to clutter up the boards, eh?

 

[Treebore]

You know, until I read this thread I was going to give 4E another year to win me over. Now I am thinking it would be a waste of time. I think it would be more productive for me to just admit I don't like 4E enough to want it, steal the good ideas for my game, and just buy the modules.

Hmmmm. That sounds like a solid game plan for me.

 

[SSquirrel]

Wait 2 weeks and pick them up at 1/2 Price Books Treebore