When will you get over it?

[grimwell]

So a few baseline considerations:


Wizards released 4E and it's now the de-facto setting. This will not change any time soon.
Some people love it.
Some people are OK with it.
Some people hate it.

My question up there in the title line, "When will you get over it?" if for those of you that match up with consideration #4...

I find it very difficult to find a discussion thread about 4E anywhere on the internet that isn't crashed by folks from consideration #4 who feel compelled to voice their offense to the new system.

Guys, we get it. You don't like 4th Edition. You are angry at Wizards over it. You have posted, in many places mind you, that you will never buy these books, or play a game using them. That's great. It's your choice. You should certainly be comfortable with it, and your discussions about the flaws you find in it are actually good reading as some of you can really break a game system down to raw components.

That noted, can you step back a little bit and get out of the threads that aren't angry with Wizards? Fair is fair and you should be able to show your displeasure over the new system, but others should be able to talk about the system in a positive light without having the discussion crashed by someone who wants to be angry with Wizards.

Personally I'd appreciate it and respect ya more if you could contain yourselves a bit and let some of us just be happy with the new system. Is that too much to ask? I promise not to jump into your critical discussions and tell you that you shouldn't be angry and should buy every book Wizards puts out. ;)

[starfalconkd]

Just don't read the threads that complain about 4e then. The point of this community is to be able to express our thoughts and feelings. Truthfully, the fact that I don't like 4e does not affect my life in any way, shape, or form. I don't really have to "get over it." It doesn't matter.

[Dimthar]

That noted, can you step back a little bit and get out of the threads that aren't angry with Wizards? Fair is fair and you should be able to show your displeasure over the new system, but others should be able to talk about the system in a positive light without having the discussion crashed by someone who wants to be angry with Wizards.

Unfortunately for too many people this sounds like a "Call for Auto-Censorship". References to "Reigns of Terror" due to the 4E Revolution are already voiced out.

Also You don't need an angry person to "Mess" a thread, sometimes it takes only "Three headed evil Flying Nuns" to de-rail the topic.

I guess is the nature of the beast.

.

Wow! I Just Raised to Level 15

[boulet]

I shall not derail topics by talking of stupid flying evil nuns anymore.
I shall not derail topics by talking of stupid flying evil nuns anymore.
I shall not derail topics by talking of stupid flying evil nuns anymore.
I shall not derail topics by talking of stupid flying evil nuns anymore.
I shall not derail topics by talking of stupid flying evil nuns anymore.
...
I shall not derail topics by talking of stupid flying evil nuns anymore.

and hundred * sigh *

I think I got over it ! Can I go on spamming 4e threads now ?

[ryan973]

Personnally I hope it never stops. I am aware that this particular online community has a slightly more in faver split towards fourth but many others dont. The worst one is definetly the wizard community itself. Wich i would say would be the absolute best place to post our misgiving about fourth. of couse they will eather lock or delete your thread. One of the reasones for everyone to continue to post is so that others out there who are insulted can know that there not alone and that they dont have to conform to this new edition to get players. For instance my local gaming store is actually suffering from the changes. they made a killing of of fourth for the first week until word got around and now no one is buying fourth or 3.5.

[mrken]

There, someone said it. For weeks I have been thinking the same thoughts as I have been reading all these posts about how terrible 4.0 is. Well, I don’t really care one way or the other since I jumped off the train back when 3.0 became 3.5. I had problems when WotC took over for TSR. WotC is in many ways no different that TSR, they wanted to make money (either that of they would go out of business and everyone would be sad). It is my opinion that I want them to make money, and I did my part to keep them in business when they was TSR, but I found my niche. Now days I pretty much don’t need to buy a boat load of stuff to keep my game going pretty much indefinitely. I don’t need 4.0 like I didn’t need 3.5, but if you need to make the change make it. If you don’t, don’t. And yes you do have the right to complain, Lord knows I did. Just know, it is wearing, on everyone, even you. Give it a break or keep on hammering on it, that’s what this forum is for. It is a place to get it off your chest, kind of wish I had this venue back at 3.5.



For instance my local gaming store is actually suffering from the changes. they made a killing of of fourth for the first week until word got around and now no one is buying fourth or 3.5.


Hey, I heard the same thing from my FLGS. They are having financial troubles I hear so I went down and bought a few boxes of the plastic minis for my game. I can't see buying any 4.0 stuff but I do want to support my LFGS. Besides, one can't have too many minis can they?

So far I probably have enough unpainted minis to keep me alive another five years.

[Christopher_rowe]

...can you step back a little bit and get out of the threads that aren't angry with Wizards?

Apparently, it is.

Personally I'd appreciate it and respect ya more if you could contain yourselves a bit and let some of us just be happy with the new system.I, likewise, would appreciate it. I'm sure many others would as well.

Is that too much to ask?Here's hoping that one day very soon, it won't be.

[Farcaster]

I agree wholeheartedly with what Grimwell is saying. Far be it from me from preventing people from expressing their opinions about the new edition whether they be positive or negative. P&PG is not associated with or beholden to Wizards of the Coast after all. However, I am tired of seeing every thread on 4th edition derailed with "I don't like it. I won't buy it. And here's another reason I hate it ..."

There are threads that have been started that are explicitly for impressions and thoughts on the new edition. Those are the place for posting feedback on how you feel about 4th edition. Other threads that have been started to talk about elements of 4th edition, such as what house rules people may be using, questions about 4th edition mechanics, discussions about races and classes -- well, we just don't need to hear about how you hate 4e on those. That isn't the topic of the thread.

So, please, if you are one of the folk that has been trying to change the topic on every thread to a WotC/4e hate-fest or if you are one of these ones that just has to make sure that every 4e thread regardless of what it is about has at least one post from you that says you hate it -- KNOCK IT OFF ALREADY! Okay?

If not, then don't be surprised when your off topic posts get moved to a more appropriate thread...

[Valdar]

So, please, if you are one of the folk that has been trying to change the topic on every thread to a WotC/4e hate-fest or if you are one of these ones that just has to make sure that every 4e thread regardless of what it is about has at least one post from you that says you hate it -- KNOCK IT OFF ALREADY! Okay?

I'd vote for this being stated in a new, stickied thread in the D&D forum. This is definitely an issue here.

Though these forums are a lot better than Wizards' own, which has every useful thread filled to ten pages with tangential rants. I can see why even Wizards employees hang out at EnWorld instead.

[fmitchell]

While I wouldn't mind hearing specific critiques of D&D 4e -- e.g. "the Warlord class is weak because ..." -- the amount of whining about the very existence of a new edition, or the fact that WotC did a major ground-up rewrite, is rapidly becoming intolerable. I'm sorry that the new edition won't work with existing campaign worlds, play styles, or house rules ... but we all get it already.

In fact, I'm already sick of hearing about 4e ... and can't wait to play a session for myself, just to distinguish the truth from the hype ... and the bile.

Maybe you guys can move on to trash the new Basic Roleplaying? "Where are the Ducks?" "The Major Wounds Table is rubbish, give me Hit Locations!" "Hit Locations are rubbish, give me the Major Wounds Table!" "I want to play a Shaman, so Magic, Sorcery, Mutations, Psionics, and Super Powers stink!" Come on, you guys can do it.

[Kilrex]

Damn, you tricked me! I didn't see 4e in the title and I read the thread. OMG, my eyes are going to fall out. Please warn me next time by attaching the proper edition tag to the thread. Okay?

[Valdar]

One of the reasones for everyone to continue to post is so that others out there who are insulted can know that there not alone and that they dont have to conform to this new edition to get players.

Or you could go read the Campaign Invitations forum. Or post there. Or do what most 3.5 gamers are doing and continue to play their existing games.

4e is released. 3.5 is more than complete- it's already bloated to unplayability, and further material will only bloat it more. What do you hope to accomplish with your whining at this point? That everyone will hate 4e and WotC will go under, taking D&D with it, proving you right at the expense of our beloved hobby?

[fmitchell]

One of the reasones for everyone to continue to post is so that others out there who are insulted ...

Yes, a company discontinuing support for an older product to support a newer product is an unforgivable insult.

Despite the fact that Paizo will continue to support an extension of 3.5, other companies will likewise not switch, and the OGL ensures that the base system will always survive, WotC hath SLAIN our BELOVED GAME, and put a FOUL HELLSPAWNED SIMULACRUM in its PLACE! THE BLOOD OF 3.5 CRIES OUT FOR REVENGE!!! KILL THE IMPOSTER!!! RIP ITS *cough* *cough* *hack* *wheeze*

... sorry, too much screaming on the Internet is bad for you.

4e is released. 3.5 is more than complete- it's already bloated to unplayability, and further material will only bloat it more. What do you hope to accomplish with your whining at this point? That everyone will hate 4e and WotC will go under, taking D&D with it, proving you right at the expense of our beloved hobby?

Well, you can play 3.5 if you're willing to do some serious trimming ... you don't have to use The Actually Fully Complete Adventurer, This Time We Mean It, Volume IV.

And sinking the flagship won't kill the hobby. Granted, it will probably put a serious dent in it, until Hasbro sells D&D to some other fools who dare to think they can improve on 3.5 (or 3.0, 2ed, 1ed, Basic, or Original White Box) and thus once again incur the Wrath of the Fatbeards. But, believe it or not, there are more RPGs out there than D&D. No really. Look past the brooding shelves of dark angsty White Wolf and you'll see all sorts of things ...

[Webhead]

...But, believe it or not, there are more RPGs out there than D&D. No really. Look past the brooding shelves of dark angsty White Wolf and you'll see all sorts of things ...

Or, better yet, scour the internet. There are a plethora of interesting, fun games out there that are only available electronically or via "print-on-demand" services. Cool stuff you will never find at Barnes & Noble (or even Half Price Books) no matter how hard or often you try.

Drivethrurpg.com
Rpgnow.com
Indiepressrevolution.com

...to name a few...

[Aidan]

Grimwell, while I concur with your sentiment, your appeal will more than likely earn you only flames.

In my experience, in any community, if a change is made there will be some who cannot stand it and become very upset.

The furor is fueled by a handful of disgruntled people who post (often repeatedly) in every thread regarding the change always with the same fallacious (and I use this term technically) arguments; appeals to emotion, appeals to tradition, and ad hominem attacks on the motivations of the perpetrators of the change.

There is nothing to be done about these people. On a positive note, the furor over 4e will allow the discerning lurker to determine who the tossers are on this forum.

[agoraderek]

Grimwell. i hear ya, that's why i started the "whats wrong with 4e thread", figured i'd give y'all a break.

Look past the brooding shelves of dark angsty White Wolf and you'll see all sorts of things ...

always thought it was "whiny, petulant white wolf", but, you know, to each his own...

[SpiffyBananaFoot]

There is nothing to be done about these people. On a positive note, the furor over 4e will allow the discerning lurker to determine who the tossers are on this forum.

- Classic!

[mrken]

Ok, I'm over it. :lol:

[Valdar]

And sinking the flagship won't kill the hobby. Granted, it will probably put a serious dent in it, until Hasbro sells D&D to some other fools who dare to think they can improve on 3.5 (or 3.0, 2ed, 1ed, Basic, or Original White Box) and thus once again incur the Wrath of the Fatbeards. But, believe it or not, there are more RPGs out there than D&D. No really. Look past the brooding shelves of dark angsty White Wolf and you'll see all sorts of things ...

By "hobby" I meant D&D, not gaming in general. I've played plenty of GURPS, so that would be my next choice. I've found D&D better suited to the typical gamer though ("What? I can target the eye and instantly kill people with every hit if I crank my attack skill? I think that's my new character concept..."). GURPS works better if character concept comes before rules.

[Farcaster]

I've found D&D better suited to the typical gamer though ("What? I can target the eye and instantly kill people with every hit if I crank my attack skill? I think that's my new character concept

Called shots were never an official rule in D&D that I recall in any addition. There may have been some optional rules for it, but those haven't made an appearance in 3rd or 4th -- at least in any of the core materials.

[Valdar]

Called shots were never an official rule in D&D that I recall in any addition. There may have been some optional rules for it, but those haven't made an appearance in 3rd or 4th -- at least in any of the core materials.

I meant in GURPS- Eye shots have been in every edition AFAIK. For the more story-driven roleplayer, GURPS gives you a lot more latitude for realizing your character concept, but as a combat game, it tends more toward realism than playability, hence "called shot to the eye" as the game-breaker. For those sorts of players, D&D's abstract combat makes for a more playable game.

[Webhead]

I meant in GURPS- Eye shots have been in every edition AFAIK. For the more story-driven roleplayer, GURPS gives you a lot more latitude for realizing your character concept, but as a combat game, it tends more toward realism than playability, hence "called shot to the eye" as the game-breaker. For those sorts of players, D&D's abstract combat makes for a more playable game.

Yeah, called shots were always a tricky element of RPG combat. They had to be advantageous enough to make them worth attempting, but delicate enough not to spoil game balance or serve as a way for low-powered heroes to kill high-powered enemies in a single blow.

There's a very fine line between "shooting him in the eyes will turn the battle in our favor" and "shooting him in the eyes will end the battle right now".

[agoraderek]

Yeah, called shots were always a tricky element of RPG combat. They had to be advantageous enough to make them worth attempting, but delicate enough not to spoil game balance or serve as a way for low-powered heroes to kill high-powered enemies in a single blow.

There's a very fine line between "shooting him in the eyes will turn the battle in our favor" and "shooting him in the eyes will end the battle right now".

i think thats one of the reasons i always drifted back to d&d. the more detailed the simulation in combat, the less fun i had running the game. i like describing the effects of attacks (nothing too graphic, mind you), and having a table or a "called shot" system took some of that away from me. now, i liked reading the crit tables in rolemaster (for example), those ICE guys were downright nasty and silly in turns, but it didnt really add to the fun for me when playing...

:D oh, and im over it, i'll play 4e some day, perhaps, and i've run out of bile. :cool:

[Thoth-Amon]

Just don't read the threads that complain about 4e then. The point of this community is to be able to express our thoughts and feelings. Truthfully, the fact that I don't like 4e does not affect my life in any way, shape, or form. I don't really have to "get over it." It doesn't matter.
I couldnt have said it better. What's kinda sad, is that these complainers will do it again when 5.0 is released. It's a popular product, after all. I myself didnt even blink an eye when i heard 4.0 would be released. I didnt blink and eye for 3.5 either. I love DnD in all its forms. The way i figure it, the more editions i play, the more gaming options/groups i have to play the game with.

Thoth-Amon

[Kilrex]

I couldnt have said it better. What's kinda sad, is that these complainers will do it again when 5.0 is released. It's a popular product, after all. I myself didnt even blink an eye when i heard 4.0 would be released. I didnt blink and eye for 3.5 either. I love DnD in all its forms. The way i figure it, the more editions i play, the more gaming options/groups i have to play the game with.

Thoth-Amon

If 5.0 was good, I would buy it and upgrade. I liked 3.5 mostly for the fact they got rid of thac0 and race/class level restrictions but didn't like the skill checks as much as I did for AD&D. 4.0 has some good ideas, but most of those have been overshadowed by the rest of the stuff (notice I was nice and did not insert profanity).

[agoraderek]

I couldnt have said it better. What's kinda sad, is that these complainers will do it again when 5.0 is released. It's a popular product, after all. I myself didnt even blink an eye when i heard 4.0 would be released. I didnt blink and eye for 3.5 either. I love DnD in all its forms. The way i figure it, the more editions i play, the more gaming options/groups i have to play the game with.

Thoth-Amon

it really depends on what they do with 5.0. i like the system well enough, they just changed the fluff too much for it to be compatable with my homebrew campaign, and i dont want to get into "but, it's CORE!" arguments if i disallow dragonborn warlords...

plus, im not happy with the current GSL, and (after looking at the 3pp designer sites, they aren't either), but, if WotC wants to be 90's TSR, IP wise, you know what they say about those that dont know history...

i wont rant about 5.0 at all if i dont like it, as im only contemplating playing 4.0 to stay current, with someone else dming, not investing much effort into the game, like i have with past editions.

strangely enough, 3x didnt annoy me at all, as it conformed to much that i had already houseruled anyway, particularly multiclassing, demi-human level limits, class restrictions, skills and whatnot, so it was like "cool, they changed core to more like i play, nice...".

i do hope WotC does well, though, as a healthy D&D is good for the industry, but even if they falter, Hasbro will sell the name off to someone else who will give it a go.

after much thought, the release of 4.0 and the new GSL really isnt going to affect me much, OGL is still alive and kicking, so, at least for a couple years, 3pps will release compatable product, so my gaming impulse buying fix will be satiated, and life in Hatheg will continue to unfold.

[Skunkape]

I couldnt have said it better. What's kinda sad, is that these complainers will do it again when 5.0 is released. It's a popular product, after all. I myself didnt even blink an eye when i heard 4.0 would be released. I didnt blink and eye for 3.5 either. I love DnD in all its forms. The way i figure it, the more editions i play, the more gaming options/groups i have to play the game with.

Thoth-Amon

I don't care for 4.0. I like what they did with 3.5, so I went with that edition. If 5.0 is better than 3.5, then I switch to that one but so far, I'm not interested in 4.0, don't like what I've seen with it.

[Kilrex]

I don't care for 4.0. I like what they did with 3.5, so I went with that edition. If 5.0 is better than 3.5, then I switch to that one but so far, I'm not interested in 4.0, don't like what I've seen with it.

I said the same at first, but have discovered the skill challenges are great with minor changes. We ditched the initiatives and each peson takes turn based on who started first and going around table from there. Even the least RP oriented person in our group started getting into it. We are adding the skill challenge concept to our 3.P games.

[Skunkape]

I said the same at first, but have discovered the skill challenges are great with minor changes. We ditched the initiatives and each peson takes turn based on who started first and going around table from there. Even the least RP oriented person in our group started getting into it. We are adding the skill challenge concept to our 3.P games.

Actually, my next campaign, I'm going to go back to the Basic Role Playing system put out by Chaosium. I stopped playing the system a long time ago, but want to go back to it because I like it even better than DnD and the rest of my players are interested in it as well.

[Valdar]

I don't care for 4.0.

Um, read the original post?

[Total Nerd v2.135 (final)]

It almost reminds me of the textbook scam of academic institutions.
change almost nothing. rearrange text. add new graphic art. get a new cover. charge more money.
I suppose what I am wondering is how significant a difference is there between 3.5 and 4e? is it as significant as the difference between the 12th and 13th edition of a hypothetical academic textbook, which is to say, not at all different?

The core mechanics, i mean....

[fmitchell]

It almost reminds me of the textbook scam of academic institutions.
change almost nothing. rearrange text. add new graphic art. get a new cover. charge more money.
I suppose what I am wondering is how significant a difference is there between 3.5 and 4e? is it as significant as the difference between the 12th and 13th edition of a hypothetical academic textbook, which is to say, not at all different?

The core mechanics, i mean....

Apart from rolling a d20, adding bonuses, and comparing to a target number, 4e is almost completely different from 3.x. That's the main problem, if you've read the preceding posts: characters in 3.5 or earlier do not translate to 4e AT ALL. (Unless you count taking the concept and generating a whole other character around it from scratch ... which is about the same work as "translating" from D&D 3.5 to BRP, GURPS, OSIRIC, Tunnels and Trolls, etc.)

[Total Nerd v2.135 (final)]

yep, thats what I hear, that almost everything about combat and skills has changed.
Thats a little intimidating. and frustrating. all of my characters and experiences are 3.x.
although it can be a hassle to learn new rules, it can also be fun and exciting...
So the answer to my question then would be yes, the 4e books are worth buying.

[fmitchell]

CAVEAT: I've never been a fan of any D&D version.

So the answer to my question then would be yes, the 4e books are worth buying.

If you have the disposable income, and/or get them at a discount, sure. That's what I decided, even though I probably will never use them again. (I was in a 4e game for the last six months, and after playing for a while I decided it's just not my thing.) D&D is a popular game, so it behooves me to understand it ... and if I get into a game, I'll know what I'm doing.

For the same reason I also own all the central (new) World of Darkness books (WoD, Vampire, Werewolf, Mage, Promethean, Changeling, and Hunter).

YMMV, as usual.

[tesral]

yep, thats what I hear, that almost everything about combat and skills has changed.
Thats a little intimidating. and frustrating. all of my characters and experiences are 3.x.
although it can be a hassle to learn new rules, it can also be fun and exciting...
So the answer to my question then would be yes, the 4e books are worth buying.

How are you positioned? (I don't mean at your desk) For me they are less than worthless. I have been playing the game for 32 years now. My entire campaign world is built around the assumptions of the old system. To convert to 4e I have to throw out three decades of creative work. It's just not going to happen.

[Webhead]

No edition is "better" or "worse" than another in any intellectually meaningful way. They are just different. Each edition plays differently to appeal to different sensibilities. What one person admires, another might despise, possibly even for the exact same reason ("superheroic" vs. "gritty" etc).

Value is where you find it. Play the edition(s) that is/are the most fun for you and your players at the game table and which seem to best enforce the style of game you want to play...because any single game has strengths and weaknesses and no game does everything equally well. If it's not fun, don't play it.

I can tell you that there are certain types of fantasy campaigns that 3.X will handle very well and there are those which it will fail at miserably. Likewise, I'm sure 4e excels at the emulation of certain kinds of fantasy campaigns...and there are others that it could not hope to do justice.

D&D especially, is a very niche game. It is designed with a very specific purpose in mind. It does what it is designed to do and not much else. Each edition, from White Box to 4e, is designed to do something different...and each has its successes and failings. Why the heck do you think TSR continued to publish new material for the Basic D&D line at the same time that 1e and 2e AD&D were on the market? Because no one thing will satisfy everyone all the time.

[MortonStromgal]

I have been playing the game for 32 years now. My entire campaign world is built around the assumptions of the old system.

Do you think this is a problem innate to the mechanics or just lacking enough fluff? Its only a matter of time till we see Druids and alike make a comeback. I'm wondering if this will still be a problem a year or two from now. With nWOD for example you could run 99% of VtM stuff now but its a huge pain still (which in my mind is why I would currently still play good old VtM), but it can reasonably coverted with all the available supplements for VtR now.

[Total Nerd v2.135 (final)]

How are you positioned? (I don't mean at your desk) For me they are less than worthless. I have been playing the game for 32 years now. My entire campaign world is built around the assumptions of the old system. To convert to 4e I have to throw out three decades of creative work. It's just not going to happen.

Tesral, Exactly! Its a stupid compromise between disappointing all the veterans who have spent enormous amounts of time and energy on their own campaigns and characters, maps, everything, and gratifying the noobs who just bought their rulebooks. I see absolutely nothing wrong with 3.5, which, by the way, just came out (it seems). The rules are getting more and more complex with each successive edition, but at least up till 3.5 they sort of built upon the previous editions in a linear and logical way. 4e is a transformation? perhaps worth learning, but not using if it is a slap in the face for all those gold veterans who would lose so much in the transition.
When I said 'buy', I suppose i meant 'download as pdf files'. If WoC was not so monopolistic and proprietary in so many ways, I probably would have 'bought' me 4e books.

[Total Nerd v2.135 (final)]

And I do also agree with the aforementioned point about the need for a wide variety of materials to satisfy the largest number of people. It just frightens me to think that a company started by (or formed from numerous mergers of) kind-hearted fantasy-roleplay geeks turned into such profiteering and typical industries. you'd think that geeks like gygax and arneson would have made kind of open, community based GNU license-esque game.
Then again, didn't Wizards get bought up by Hasbro (the microsoft of toys)?

Also... 4e was designed by a COMPLETELY different lot of fellows. a new generation, as it were, of designers and implementers.

[Mindbomb]

I think the original complaint could be solved with a different section for the 4E 'clique' in the forums since I think that most would agree that aside from brand name this is a huge step from any other form of D&D and therein lies the problem. While I may have been one of the many to voice my opinion about 4E where it wasn't wanted, I don't wander around D&D forums trolling for 4E material/content to thumb my nose at. It's just that I look at the 'D&D' forums because D&D is a game I've enjoyed for almost 15 years and when I can't use any of the information because it's so foreign to any other system of the game that I've played it gets very frustrating and I feel the need to voice my unwanted opinion.

What I'm trying to say I guess is that, while I greatly appreciate this forum as a resource and all the people here who contribute, if it were an option I would create a subsection for 4E in the D&D forums if this is really as big a problem as its being presented to be.

[fmitchell]

What I'm trying to say I guess is that, while I greatly appreciate this forum as a resource and all the people here who contribute, if it were an option I would create a subsection for 4E in the D&D forums if this is really as big a problem as its being presented to be.

We already have tags to denote which edition of D&D each thread is talking about. Speaking for myself, I don't see how a subforum would make the distinction any clearer. Those who don't want to be reminded that a new edition even exists may feel differently, of course.

[tesral]

Do you think this is a problem innate to the mechanics or just lacking enough fluff? Its only a matter of time till we see Druids and alike make a comeback. I'm wondering if this will still be a problem a year or two from now. With nWOD for example you could run 99% of VtM stuff now but its a huge pain still (which in my mind is why I would currently still play good old VtM), but it can reasonably coverted with all the available supplements for VtR now.

It's not the same game. The difference between 3.5 D&D and 4e is greater than the difference between GRUPS and Hero System, that serious. It's not a better game, it's a different game. Great if you are starting from zero, a deal breaker if you have been in the game for any degree of time.

In effect the long time player is thrown under the Forry Bus to get new players.

[Valdar]

So, I suppose the answer to the question posed in the title of this thread is, "no time soon"?

[Webhead]

...Great if you are starting from zero, a deal breaker if you have been in the game for any degree of time.

In effect the long time player is thrown under the Forry Bus to get new players.

Disclaimer: The following statements are not a defense of 4e or any other edition of D&D. They are simply thoughts, reactions and postulations based on the continued scrutiny of the evolution of D&D as a rules document.

I suppose that really depends on what you are or aren't trying to get out of it or how attached you are to previous conventions. For me D&D (any edition) as a game system always took second place to D&D as a storytelling sandbox. By that I mean, the rules themselves weren't nearly as interesting to me as the potential stories that could be told in a world of D&D-esque fantasy. I was "attached" to D&D, certainly and owned my share of books at one time or another, but it was D&D as a concept, not as an encyclopedia that captured my attention. I couldn't care less whether an Ability Check was handled with a "roll under" or "add bonus, roll high" type of system...what mattered was that I could tell the kinds of thrilling, adventurous sword-and-sorcery tales that D&D was supposed to be about.

Now, I'm not saying that this validates the existence of 4e in any way. I'm simply saying that if it is a continuity in rules or rules-based precedents (e.g. fire-and-forget spells, etc.) that one is looking for, then yes, 4e seems like it leads the old-schoolers on a long walk off a short pier. If one is looking for something more "conceptual", my limited knowledge of 4e leads me to believe that it neither directly hinders nor directly supports that goal, simply because it looks like it focuses more on "how" it functions as a game system rather than "why". Of course, GMs are free to invent their own "why", but one could do this with any game system, so it is not a function of 4e itself.

I am, perhaps oddly, finding myself led to the notion that 4e is a game better off in the hands of someone who has played previous editions rather than somone who is completely new to D&D. Why? Because 4e seems to do very little "filling in the blanks" when compared to other editions of D&D. It gives you the rules and tells you how to use them, but it doesn't tell you much beyond that. Just look at the Monster Manual. The stat blocks are very well organized and it looks like monsters would be easier to manage and run than ever...but that's pretty much all they are...stat blocks.

4e seems to presuppose a DM who's experienced at least one other edition. What the heck is a goblin and what are they like? If you haven't played a previous version of D&D, you will probably have no clue. In a seemingly odd twist, this gives "old" players an advantage over new ones, namely: what to do.

My point? I wouldn't give 4e to someone new to RPGs. I wouldn't give them 3.X either. I would try to show them the spirit, the "why" that makes D&D such a long-lived and interesting game before I try to get them married to one set of rules or another.

The concept of D&D is a good one: high-action, high-magic fantasy adventure. The individual rules editions of D&D are all frustrating in one way or another. 4e doesn't change this. It's just another elephant in the herd.

For me, 3.X was the most consistently frustrating of the editions that I've played and is responsible for my rapid decline in interest in all things D&D (and d20) since about 2002. I'm slowly recovering, but I'm still weary of D&D on a rules level. In terms of story-potential however, D&D is still somewhere in my heart. Time will tell if there will ever exist a rules set that can match D&D rules enthusiasm with my D&D story enthusiasm. It's a long road ahead. The stories were always far better than the rules anyway.

[Farcaster]

Its a stupid compromise between disappointing all the veterans ... and gratifying the noobs who just bought their rulebooks.

Careful now how we sling that "noob" monicker around. I've been playing for twenty years now, and I like and play 4th edition. It would be a bit disingenuous to say that 4e is only enjoyed by new/inexperienced players.

What I'm trying to say I guess is that, while I greatly appreciate this forum as a resource and all the people here who contribute, if it were an option I would create a subsection for 4E in the D&D forums if this is really as big a problem as its being presented to be.
Aye, that was one of the main reasons we created the tags. You can easily weed out the topics by edition using those.

[tesral]

So, I suppose the answer to the question posed in the title of this thread is, "no time soon"?

No, I'm over it, I'm over worrying and dealing with Forry. Two busy playing my own game. I'm over Lizards. I stopped buying new books when they didn't ditch the lines, and now with Forry they obliviated the need to ever buy a book from them again.

Plazio on the other hand has been getting my business.

[Webhead]

If Paizo ever published D&D: Saga Edition, I would definately have to pick it up. I won't be holding my breath though. Right now, my fantasy focus is on Warriors & Warlocks. It's almost here... :dance:

[Engar]

I applaud those posting honest, respectful and thoughtful opinions. Seeking to stifle that is shameful.

[tesral]

If Paizo ever published D&D: Saga Edition, I would definately have to pick it up. I won't be holding my breath though. Right now, my fantasy focus is on Warriors & Warlocks. It's almost here... :dance:

Nothing is stopping you form taking the parts of D&D and the parts of Saga you like and doing a mashup of the two. I might not use it, but I would applaud it.

[1958Fury]

I applaud those posting honest, respectful and thoughtful opinions. Seeking to stifle that is shameful.

Asking people not to hijack unrelated threads is not the same as censorship. If the thread is "A brief critique of 4e", then criticism is warranted. If the thread is "Help me build my Eladrin Paladin", then the constant interjections on why 4e sucks are just annoying. It's not a request to stop complaining, it's a request to complain in the right place.

[Thoth-Amon]

I guess i'm one of the lucky veterans for i can just as easily jump into any edition, homebrew edition, or anything in-between. Sure, i do have a favorite, but the comaraderie of playing comes first.

Oh, and btw, i'm over it. :D

[Dimthar]

Does a "Post" Inviting People for an evening of Beers and Wings counts as derailing the thread?

http://www.penandpapergames.com/forums/calendar.php?do=getinfo&day=2008-11-11&e=3252&c=1

I can not get over Wings!

[Total Nerd v2.135 (final)]

Careful now how we sling that "noob" monicker around. I've been playing for twenty years now, and I like and play 4th edition. It would be a bit disingenuous to say that 4e is only enjoyed by new/inexperienced players.

true, I apologize Farcaster.

[Thoth-Amon]

Does a "Post" Inviting People for an evening of Beers and Wings counts as derailing the thread?

http://www.penandpapergames.com/forums/calendar.php?do=getinfo&day=2008-11-11&e=3252&c=1

I can not get over Wings!
It sure as heck does! Especially when its out of my driving range to join in on the festivities. :wink:

[grimwell]

Asking people not to hijack unrelated threads is not the same as censorship. If the thread is "A brief critique of 4e", then criticism is warranted. If the thread is "Help me build my Eladrin Paladin", then the constant interjections on why 4e sucks are just annoying. It's not a request to stop complaining, it's a request to complain in the right place.

That was my main driver when I created this thread. I really could care less if other people don't like 4E and don't buy/play it. Their choice, their game, their money and I respect that. At the time this thread opened, it was very hard to have a discussion about 4E in a positive manner without folks jumping in to say "I don't like it!" which was getting beyond a distraction.

I think that we are beyond that here, and can easily discuss any system for it's own merits. I heavily abuse Farcaster's "Sort by edition" tool when I scan this particular sub-forum so I can read the posts in the context of their edition and not have to hop back and forth. ;P

[Thoth-Amon]

That was my main driver when I created this thread. I really could care less if other people don't like 4E and don't buy/play it. Their choice, their game, their money and I respect that. At the time this thread opened, it was very hard to have a discussion about 4E in a positive manner without folks jumping in to say "I don't like it!" which was getting beyond a distraction.

I think that we are beyond that here, and can easily discuss any system for it's own merits. I heavily abuse Farcaster's "Sort by edition" tool when I scan this particular sub-forum so I can read the posts in the context of their edition and not have to hop back and forth. ;P
You got my support, grimwell. Unfortunately, some gamers seem to see editions like they see religion: there's is the only correct one and all others suck, or wrong, or whatever.

Game on!

[Webhead]

Nothing is stopping you form taking the parts of D&D and the parts of Saga you like and doing a mashup of the two. I might not use it, but I would applaud it.

I have given it consideration in the past (in fact, my initial knee-jerk reaction to Saga was that I thought it would make an excellent clean up of 3.X) but, alas, it would require too much time and effort to make the attempt meaningful and I am far too lazy to do that by myself. It would probably require a total rebuild of the magic system along with stripping down the "Class Features" aspects and translating them into "Talents". Not that the idea doesn't appeal to me, it would just be more work than I am willing to give it.

Pathfinder seems to cling a little too closely to 3.5 for my tastes and 4e seems to take some of the good concepts of Saga and run them off a tall cliff. I'm currently in the market for a good sword-and-sorcery RPG. Consequently, I've been waiting for Warriors & Warlocks for a long time (it was first announced 2-ish years ago). I'm hoping it will inspire me.

[Thoth-Amon]

I have given it consideration in the past (in fact, my initial knee-jerk reaction to Saga was that I thought it would make an excellent clean up of 3.X) but, alas, it would require too much time and effort to make the attempt meaningful and I am far too lazy to do that by myself. It would probably require a total rebuild of the magic system along with stripping down the "Class Features" aspects and translating them into "Talents". Not that the idea doesn't appeal to me, it would just be more work than I am willing to give it.

Pathfinder seems to cling a little too closely to 3.5 for my tastes and 4e seems to take some of the good concepts of Saga and run them off a tall cliff. I'm currently in the market for a good sword-and-sorcery RPG. Consequently, I've been waiting for Warriors & Warlocks for a long time (it was first announced 2-ish years ago). I'm hoping it will inspire me.
Have you taken a gander at WFRP or the Witch Hunter: Dark Providence rpg's?

[Webhead]

Have you taken a gander at WFRP or the Witch Hunter: Dark Providence rpg's?

I've not yet had a chance to look over WFRP as none of the bookstores in my area carry it. I am also similarly unfamiliar with Witch Hunter outside of the handful of posts about it here.

I'm thinking though, that Warriors & Warlocks might fit my needs as I've always wanted to run a Battle Chasers-inspired fantasy campaign which is rather epic/superheroic in its conventions. Coming from a superhero RPG (Mutants & Masterminds), I'm thinking W&W will handle such a campaign nicely. And then, it's also a point-buy system that can be scaled back for more "traditional" fantasy campaigns as well. Win-win.

But back to your point, I am still curious about WFRP, I just don't have much opportunity to read it and get a feel for what style of play the game supports.

[Total Nerd v2.135 (final)]

One thing I like about the SW Saga is that it is FAR less complex than D&D. especially Forrey dnd. I do, however, appreciate the fact that some of you enjoy the complexity.

[MortonStromgal]

Have you taken a gander at WFRP or the Witch Hunter: Dark Providence rpg's?

Its actually WitchHunter: The Invisible War. Dark Providence is the Official Campaign/Adventures. But both it at WFRP are good. :D

[Thoth-Amon]

Its actually WitchHunter: The Invisible War. Dark Providence is the Official Campaign/Adventures. But both it at WFRP are good. :D
Thanks for the correction, MortonStromgal. I just quickly copy/pasted it from my yahoo groups page.

[fmitchell]

But back to your point, I am still curious about WFRP, I just don't have much opportunity to read it and get a feel for what style of play the game supports.

Here's a quote from the GM section, as cited in an RPG.net review (http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/11/11192.phtml):

There are worlds where courageous heroes who stand for all that is good and righteous watch over populaces of decent folk who seek to enrich their own lives and better those of the people around them.

This isn’t one of those worlds.

The Old World is one of blood, pain, sacrifice, treachery, deceit, and malice. Many of the Empire’s ‘heroes’ are dangerous rogues and blood spattered butchers. The people of the Old World are superstitious and insular, swift to believe the worst of others and slow to trust, often with good reason. Corruption is the rule, honesty the exception. Those few bright souls who still manage to accomplish truly heroic tasks frequently have to act under cover of darkness, lest they be accused of being in league with the very forces they try to combat.

Sound like fun? Good.

While I haven't played, from looking at the mechanics a lucky blow from a bandit can incapacitate, cripple, or kill a character. (Damage is 1d10 plus Weapon Damage, and even PCs only have 10-15 Wound Points.) There's a Warhammer thread (http://www.penandpapergames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7836) where you'll find more discussion.

[tesral]

Not that the idea doesn't appeal to me, it would just be more work than I am willing to give it.


You have it, you just have to be willing to give it the time and effort. I'll even predict something; you are not going to find that Fantasy RPG until you stick your fingers in and do it yourself.

Once that bug bites it never lets go.

[MortonStromgal]

WFRP 2e uses hitpoints somewhere in the 5-15 range but these unlike D&D are freebees. When you hit 0 your not dead rather you attacker gets to roll on the crit chart against you which can be anything from a minor scratch to instant death. This lets you charge in and be heroic for you HP worth of time and then retreat once you hit 0.

[Webhead]

WFRP 2e uses hitpoints somewhere in the 5-15 range but these unlike D&D are freebees. When you hit 0 your not dead rather you attacker gets to roll on the crit chart against you which can be anything from a minor scratch to instant death. This lets you charge in and be heroic for you HP worth of time and then retreat once you hit 0.

An interesting mechanic that has a certain level of appeal for the right kind of play style. I rather like the idea.

I was also fond of a similar-yet-different concept that the Furry Pirates RPG used. The game used a percentile system. Whenever a player rolled the equivalent of a "crit" in Furry Pirates (aka, they rolled exceedingly well) the weapon would do the same amount of damage as normal but would also inflict a "critical condition" based on the location of the hit and the result of rolling on a crit table. Thus, you could have characters who get horribly mangled by a unlucky hit without having to deplete their "hit points" first. Very piratey. Characters in Furry Pirates also didn't have a ton of them either and it was not a level-based system, so your hit points generally didn't increase after character creation.