4E

[CYMRO]

In light of Ishmayl's new poll, who will buy 4E?  Why? Or why not?
Who has given up on D&D in favor of other systems?



I haven't played D&D in months, as what is left of my group is helping me playtest my variant of our system.
I find that as time moves along, I cannot abide the flow of crap coming out of WotC, especially in light of their previously stated position of not releasing umpteen supplements.  

[brainface]

I doubt i'd buy 4e anytime soon, due to my "do not buy any dnd book unless you will use it in play in the next month" rule.
And honestly, the only thing i'd want out of a new edition is a simpler way to do grapple checks.

[Darkxarth]

I play D&D.  I also dabble in d20 Modern, but not much.

When WotC releases 4th Edition (because eventually they will) it'll be a changed system.  There's no reason to release 4E without a big change.  Personally, I think it'll be a change of the magic system, or the class system, but that's just my, completely uninformed opinion.  So, whether I buy it will depend on whether I like the changes they've made or not.

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

Phew!  I thought this was going to be another of the usual "paranoid about the release of 4E" threads.  I think WotC should just go ahead and release 4E so that we can get some innovation in the form of "4e sucks!" threads.

As for me, I've given up on WotC stuff altogether.  It's too complicated for me to even consider being the DM, and that's the only way I'm ever going to get to use the cool stuff.  The flavor is boring a lot of the time because they focus so much on their traditional load of drivel (alignment and how its applied, what the races are like in terms of things such as personality, the limited nature of the classes in core, etc.).  And it's all about combat, with non-combat roleplaying tacked on the side.

I'm not even going to consider variants such as Arcana Evolved.  AE is a nice system that's a refereshing departure from D&D, but it's got the same complicated rules.

My system is now Mutants & Masterminds because I can use its point-based system to build what I want to play.  And it's rules are so simple that they all fit in one book, a majority of which isn't even rules!  Maybe I'd go back to D&D if they made it like M&M. (Likelihood factor:  :morons: )

[Ninja D!]

I probably would not buy it right away...but I might.  I don't know.  Right now, I don't really play D&D as much as I play the D20 system, if you take my meaning.

[snakefing]

I'm more or less with Black Jack. I haven't owned anything D&D since 1st ed. I've got the D20 SRD bookmarked. For what it is, it is a decent system, though the grapple check thing does suck.

My biggest beef with it is that they apparently felt that they needed to retain the feel of all the old races, classes, and stuff. With only a little more work they could have made it a much better system. Only then it really wouldn't be "D&D" except in name.

That's why I'm not holding my breath for any really significant changes of the type that would interest me. Although I still do take the wait and see attitude. They might surprise me.

[Hibou]

I honestly don't know.

When 3.5 came out, I was very hesitant to switch because, well, there may have been a lot of changes but I had made a lot of very similar house rules to deal with things I didn't like. Eventually I gave in and "accepted" the system because none of my players wanted to play 3.0 when they had " so easily adapted to 3.5" (this was during a time when I actually DMed regularly). The funniest thing is, even though I labeled my games "3.5 D&D", I never could refer to them as anything but "D20" because of the changes I had made. And what's even funnier than that is the fact that they accepted my games as playable even though the only thing that really changed was the label, and maybe the Pit Fiend statistics.

I think after stating that junk that I won't ever really take part in the age of 4th Edition D&D, just because I've already found what I want. My favorite D&D system remains 2nd Edition coupled with the Player's Option series (or what some people call AD&D 2.5), and at this point if I want a rule for anything I can make it myself.

[CYMRO]

My favorite D&D system remains 2nd Edition coupled with the Player's Option series (or what some people call AD&D 2.5), and at this point if I want a rule for anything I can make it myself.

Interesting, as I completely skipped 2E, not liking the initial offerings, way back when.  I went straight from eons of mutated 1E to 3.5, and into the slide of new hybrid stuff.

[Hibou]

2.5 was fun. It added a lot of the "good" rules featured in 3.0/3.5, but had some of the old restrictions and managed to keep that "classic" gaming feel.

[Xeviat]

Wow, it sounds like I'm in the minority here. I've been quite impressed with Wizards' new creations, especially in the last year. Since I purchased 4 out of 5 of the original splat books, I shyed away from the Complete series (I only have Warrior, Psionic, and Mage, though I do have access to the others), but I've liked many of their expansion items. Deities & Demigods, Manual of the Planes, Psionics Handbook (and of course the Expanded Psionics Handbook), Heroes of Battle/Horror, Oriental Adventures, and now Tome of Battle have done much to inspire me for my own setting.

Based on the innovations in new products (Warlock/Dragonfire Adept invocations, Martial Adepts' maneuvers, and UA/PHB2), I forsee 4th Edition utilizing a new direction. I whole-heartedly expect 4th Edition to kill off some sacred cows, but I don't think it will be moving away from the d20 system; I don't think Wizards could get away with obsoleting everything (I myself have only seen a few 3.0 materials that were entirely obsoleted by the revision; mainly DR issues).

So, I'll probably check out a 4th Edition PHB, and see if it wows me.

[Hibou]

While I don't care for the 3.5 edition or the possibility of a 4e, I do admire some of the material that shows up in the new books. Some of it has inspired me (Manual of the Planes gave me many ideas for my own cosmology in the past, and may do so again), while I very much admire some of the material in certain splats (the BoVD had a few images and ideas very popular with me, and the monsters in Heroes of Horror are fun). Basically while I don't like the systems, the fluff never hurts anyone. :)

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

2.5 was fun. It added a lot of the "good" rules featured in 3.0/3.5, but had some of the old restrictions and managed to keep that "classic" gaming feel.

:soap: I once downloaded a free version of the 1E rules, and I have to say that the idea of racial level limits sickening.  If you want humans to be unique give them the free skill points and feat.  I'm not telling you what to do, I just feel that any time humans get the long end of the stick that I have to grab the other end and beat them with it.  I also just don't like some limits, such as the current alignment system, and the codes of conduct certain classes have that basically do nothing more than force them into certain roles.  Forcing people to follow certain behavioral paths does not encourage good roleplaying any more than good roleplaying.

[snakefing]

Of course, no one actually used the racial level limits in 1E. At least not for PC's. At least not in any game I ever played in or heard of.

[CYMRO]

Of course, no one actually used the racial level limits in 1E. At least not for PC's. At least not in any game I ever played in or heard of.

We did.  For about a month in the early eighties...

[Hibou]

I never ever used racial limits. I gave humans a few extra bonuses to compensate, most commonly consisting of +1 to any one ability and two extra weapon proficiency points (this was before I had access to the Players Option series; then I just went crazy).