Can I please get some information?

[Daemonhawk]

I've been a big fan of 3.5, but the fighter is such a weak class that I'm not having fun anymore. I'm currently the DM, but I'll be finishing up here a few sessions, and honestly don't want to go back to my Fighter. The Wizard in the party can bend reality and kill most enemies in one shot. I can hit things occasionally. Any tips on maybe making my players/ DM convert to 4E?

[theNater]

My basic advice is that you just tell them what you've told us: you're not having fun due to balance issues, and you understand that those issues are not as troubling in 4e. After you've said that, ask them if they're willing to give 4e a try.

If you want a bit more ammo than that, the next thing is to consider what, if any, complaints they have about 3.5. 4e tried to directly counter some complaints(like class balance), so if your group is running into those complaints, you could point to 4e's modifications as an incentive.

You may want to run a one-shot adventure for them using the 4e rules, so they can get a bit of a feel for the system and see what they think about it. Depending on your group, you may even want to offer to make the one-shot characters for them, so that you aren't asking them to do any work. (Naturally, if they don't consider character creation work, you wouldn't need to do this).

[NecroRebel]

Learn the basics about the system, then offer to DM. The vast majority of people that I've ever encountered who have ever played any RPG greatly enjoy playing them and are willing to play regardless of system, but don't necessarily want to run a game in a system that they're unfamiliar with, particularly if everyone involved is already familiar with another system. By offering to be the DM for the new system, at least initially, you'll encourage your friends to try it and, if everyone likes it, can later swap DMing duties with somebody else. DMing 4e is much, much easier than DMing 3.5, too, so it's not as onerous a suggestion as it might otherwise be.

You might also try talking to your friends about the problem that you're having, and about the possible solutions you might have. You may find it easier to simply make a new character for your 3.5 games than to swap systems, for instance, or to have the Wizard player (and, presumably, other full casters) tone down their characters' use of the various win buttons, than to learn a new system... Though I'd doubt that, myself; 4e is a simple enough system that learning the basics is probably quicker than making a good high-leveled 3.5 character.

[Reluctance]

At the end of your DMing run, offer to run a one shot or short arc of 4e for variety's sake. Most gamers are willing to try something new just for the experience.

If they're invested in the long-running plot of your game, or if they're of the hardcore "4e=WoW" camp, there won't be anything you can reasonably do to change their minds them. Either find a new group, or off your fighter and bring in a caster.

[OracleofWuffing]

What sort of opinion does your group have on 3.5's Tome of Battle? While it's not the same as 4e, they share a few foundational elements, and it could help as an interest gauge.

Of course, there's nothing like direct experience in things, so if you're looking for an easy simple thing you could run without much effort like has been suggested above, Keep on the Shadowfell was released for free by Wizards, and a bunch of people had that as their introduction campaign.

[WitchSlayer]

And if you can't get them to try 4e, then see if you can get them to try another system like FATE or Savage Worlds!

[Runeward]

I'd switch it up. If you're not having fun, everyone will be better off if you switch to something you do enjoy. There are a lot of powerful martial classes/builds, so you wouldn't even have to disrupt party balance to find your fun zone.

[Kurald Galain]

I've been a big fan of 3.5, but the fighter is such a weak class that I'm not having fun anymore. I'm currently the DM, but I'll be finishing up here a few sessions, and honestly don't want to go back to my Fighter.

It strikes me that it would be easier for you to just play another class, than to convert your whole group to a new system.

But if you do, you should be aware that 4E also has a number of weak classes (most notably the vampire, binder, and shadow assassin) so you may want to avoid those.

[tcrudisi]

It strikes me that it would be easier for you to just play another class, than to convert your whole group to a new system.

But if you do, you should be aware that 4E also has a number of weak classes (most notably the vampire, binder, and shadow assassin) so you may want to avoid those.

While 4e has weak classes, you won't really notice the difference unless one striker has optimized and the other hasn't. But, assuming equal levels of optimization, yes, the vampire, binder and assassin are weaker ... just not nearly to the same level as the Monk and Fighter are in 3.5.

[Kurald Galain]

While 4e has weak classes, you won't really notice the difference unless one striker has optimized and the other hasn't.

Well, I've seen some really ineffective characters in 4E, and not just strikers. Badly built controllers or defenders just never seem to do anything.

[fallenwarrior]

Well, I've seen some really ineffective characters in 4E, and not just strikers. Badly built controllers or defenders just never seem to do anything.

There's certainly a lot of truth in that, but then again, you could say that for any edition of D&D. For example, 3e Wizards can be one of the most powerful classes in the game at higher levels, but build them badly and they can be next to useless.

That said, 4e does have more than its fair share of melee only classes, and most of them become nearly useless against a well played foe that can stay at range. And melee types generally suffer most from status inflicting effects as well (eg, immobilized and dazed)

[Raimun]

4e is a great edition if you like melee. Not only is melee now viable, it's pretty much the best way to deal high damage... with varied attacks, too. If anyone of your party would like to be a warrior but still be awesome, they might want to try it.

That said, anyone playing a full caster will find themselves to be less powerful and having less options. I mean really. At first it will be almost like playing a Commoner with a few SFX-tricks.

[NecroRebel]

Well, I've seen some really ineffective characters in 4E, and not just strikers. Badly built controllers or defenders just never seem to do anything.

While I agree with your sentiment, it's a lot harder to make a character that truly can't contribute in 4e than in 3.x. Also, both the defender and controller are disabler roles, so if done right, they'll make nothing happen. That can sometimes be difficult to discern from doing nothing.

[Tegu8788]

It's still possible to make a bad character, and it's able to play a character poorly, but the gap between trash and high op is smaller across the board in 4e as I understand it. Having clear roles with clear understandings I think make this easier to compare classes effectiveness, but what it's meant to do is more clearly defined.

But back to the OP, check this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=230158) out for good quick info.