Positive 4th Edition

[Lupy]

I am really tired of people being so negative about something they know nothing about. I was wondering if anyone else is looking forward to 4th ed and has good news about it.

I am glad to hear it is very non-setting specific.

You?

[Rutee]

I thought it had about as much of an established setting as 3rd ed?

anyway, I'm liking the more dramatics-based system, with the Encounter/Day/At Will system, especially since it means everyone's going to have neat tricks they can do, and people's Nova abilities are easier to track.

[Lupy]

3rd ed has some fluff that says *cough*Grayhawk*cough*. 4th ed wont have that.

[Catch]

Basically everything that I've read has been very positive, or at the worst, I've been outrageously ambivalent. I'm considerably newer to D&D than the heads-in-the-sand Luddites, but having played plenty of AD&D, 3.0 and 3.5, I just can't seem to see what everyone's so worked up about.

[TempusCCK]

I think the concept of trying to bring/bringing everyone to the same power level is a good idea.

-holds back cynicism because it's a positive things thread-

[Rutee]

3rd ed has some fluff that says *cough*Grayhawk*cough*. 4th ed wont have that.

Points of Light setting has some specifics, especially with the Tieflings and Dragonborn empires.

[Jayngfet]

well, it seems that they're trying to balance it a bit

and I heard somewhere they're fixing grapple

and I think sorcerers are back in( they shouldn't have even left)

rumer has it we may see half orcs


thats it, I loathe tieflings, hate dragonborn, want fighter back in its proper and well earned place, and want tieflings to be unique and less emo if they're going to not be a series of random demonic mutations with "an aura of badness about them" if they're good aligned.

also more aasimar, less emo wangsty antiheroes, more straight up beacons of justice and half-breeds shunned by both parent races that have a reason to run off and fight spiky lizard things for a living.

[Rutee]

Tieflings aren't angsty. Try again.

[EvilElitest]

Can i do satyr?

Anyways, i like that the monsters have specific tactics, i like elementals (i shouldn't however) and i like the detail of demons and devils, a also like 4E's idea of more group fights. I like female dwarves, I like the giants mostly, i like warlocks, I like the world concept not as a generic setting but as a setting on its own, i like the Fey world and the fey under dark and i hope to like more fluff.
I don't have an option on the changes on dragons

Tieflings aren't angsty. Try again

When Rutee says it, you don't need a reason, that is all you need

from
EE

[Alyosha]

I'm looking forward to not having to confirm critical hits. I also look forward to simpler grappling rules.

I'm excited about the new abilities, especially per encounter and at will abilities.

I also like what I'm seeing about how magic is being handled in 4e. Foci and no spell schools makes it much easier for me to take in.

Luckily, I'll be seeing a better monk class in 4e. I love the concept of the monk. I don't like how it turned out in 3.5.

The Warlord class looks like it'll be fun to try.

I also like that Cleric healing abilities boost other party members' abilities to heal themselves, rather than it being a set amount of heals per day.

[Lord Iames Osari]

I'm looking forward to the new edition a lot.

[Draz74]

I like that monsters' difficulty is measured by "Level" instead of CR.

I like the encounter building system with monster roles, such as Elite/Solo/Minion monsters.

I like the new cosmology. And the devil/demon differentiation.

I really like the promise of decent social encounter and trap encounter systems.

The multiclass system, based on "X Training" feats, is slowly growing on me. If it's implemented very well.

I like alignment playing a much smaller role, though I think I'll still be houseruling it a lot.

I liked the promise of no racial gods, although it seems it was misleading.

I like having differences in game for damage that represents stamina, morale, etc., vs. actual wounds. Although I'd prefer a VP/WP system. The Death & Dying rules still need some houseruling, probably, but they're an improvement over 3e. The Healing Surge rules look quite promising indeed, to go with the "not always wounds" interpretation of HP.

In some cases I like classes becoming more generic: rogues having major combat tricks besides just sneak attacks; warlocks having multiple sources for their Pacts. Warlocks, the way they're being made, make a much better "Core Wizard-Alternative Arcane Caster Class" than Sorcerers did.

I like the new Halflings. With a Cajun flavor interpretation. They would make me actually consider putting halflings in a homebrew world. Maybe.

I like having a well-supported dragon race. Not sure Dragonborn are better than Kobolds would have been, but at least there's a core reptilian race. (Just please don't make them too Oriental in flavor, like some of the art has suggested!)

As far as elves being separated into "woodsy" and "academic" races: IT'S ABOUT FREAKING TIME.

I like how weapon choices (for fighters) and racial choices will keep being important throughout the game, as you pick racial feats or weapon-specific powers.

I really love that they're making characters less dependent on magical equipment, even if I'm not thrilled with the exact way they're doing it.

I like many magical effects being turned into "rituals" instead of spells.

I like the removal of iterative attacks.

I like the changes to Reach, the Stunned/Dazed conditions, the "shift" and "move" system (instead of Withdraw and Charge full-round actions and stuff), as gleaned from the DDM rulebook.

By implication, I'm iffy or negative about most things that I didn't list here. If I were writing that list, it would be just as long as this one. Oh well.

[Zincorium]

I honestly have nothing that's bugging me about 4th edition, so I have to say that pretty much everything seems like a positive. To elaborate on some of the things I really like:

-Actual meaningful differences in the weapons for fighters. A swordsman and an axemen really should play differently, not only by realism but because of the flavor difference between the two.

-Spellcasters not carrying around a parchment arsenal of scrolls.

-No vancian casting. It's never made sense to me for an RPG.

-Points of light. Granted, that's how I've been trying to DM 3rd ed, but it was a bit of a hassle.

-Classes functioning 1-30. This is at least their stated intention, and I'm looking forward to at least a good effort.

Edit:

Can i do satyr?

I really don't think the Satyr would like that.

[Xefas]

At first I didn't think I would like the separation of "Boss" and "Mook" monsters, but I think its grown on me so far. It looks like Boss Monsters will get more actions per round, or at least their abilities will require less actions to perform, which sounds good to me. Nothing like your badass monster pulling off one super awesome feat of awesomeness before he's shredded into ground beef because the players get 4x the actions...

Most of all, streamlined skills, and non-suck traps are my favorites so far. 'specially those traps. Man, I can't wait for those trap mechanics...

[Jayngfet]

oh, I also like 1-30 too, just remembered...

[Eldmor]

I personally can't wait for 4th Edition and the new mechanics it will introduce. I'm convinced it will be an easy character transition with talent trees and such in the base classes. I've been getting more people in the RP club I'm in excited about it, even the old fogies that started off in AD&D.
Biggest things I like so far: core warlock, class balance, and the adventuring "tiers".

[Farmer42]

I'd be happy about any new system hitting the mainstream. I just enjoy rule sets. Among the specific things, the new system for negative HP has me excited, as do the higher starting HP. Magic items being PHB not DMG is nice as well, and if they can finally make the fighter a viable option, I'm done with 3.5.

[Corlis]

Hmph, I thought this was a thread about new rules for positive energy channeling...

I'm liking the removal of Vancian casting, if just because it means that a wizard is never reduced to plinking away with his crossbow. Also, if I can finally join a group, I won't be the only one who's a bit inexperienced with the rules

[Innis Cabal]

Im leary still......but the worst it can be is White wolf revised world...and i still play that..so no biggie

[nepphi]

I too am pleased with the improved death and dying rules, and with class roles as a balancing factor. Contrary to a lot of the MMO worries, I'm confident that the new class balance will actually HELP dms design balanced and interesting encounters that don't take up the whole game, allowing them to spend more time focusing on what I come to an RPG for, the story.

[Jimbob]

Im still not 100% sure yet, but one thing I do really like is the sounds of when a character goes below 0 hp's. The way it depends on your level depends on how low you can go, so that fatial hit when you only have 20 hp left might not kill you straight off because you can go down to -50hp before you die.

[seedjar]

I've like most of what I've heard so far, or at least the ideas presented behind it. My chief objection is that I can't afford to replace all my books, and I don't especially have problems with 3.5 and working around it's rougher edges. I've been stealing a lot of the new mechanical stuff for my own game and have recently hacked together a dragon that works a lot like what the wizards.com release described (haven't had a chance to turn it loose yet.) It will be different and transitioning may be uncomfortable, but I think 4th will be good for the brand. I'm sure someone in my group will pick up the new core books eventually - I'm up to try it - but I think we'll be fine in the meantime.
~Joe

[Kurald Galain]

I am really tired of people being so negative about something they know nothing about.

I'm glad to hear people can be so positive about something they know nothing about.

And I'm glad about how fans of 4E wouldn't dream of being continuously insulting to people who don't share their opinion of things they know nothing about.

[Zincorium]

I'm glad to hear people can be so positive about something they know nothing about.

What you describe is known as 'hope'. It's reasonably popular.

And I'm glad about how fans of 4E wouldn't dream of being continuously insulting to people who don't share their opinion of things they know nothing about.

...And then the sarcasm.

Frankly, I think you're way off base here, the only way to really get insulted for not wanting to switch is to first insult everyone who is switching. Being hostile to other people about this is unwarranted either way.

You don't like how 4th edition might be? Don't talk about it, talk about whatever edition you are playing. Peace among the factions really is that simple.

[Rutee]

I'm glad to hear people can be so positive about something they know nothing about.

And I'm glad about how fans of 4E wouldn't dream of being continuously insulting to people who don't share their opinion of things they know nothing about.

To be perfectly frank, utter pessimism is much closer to trolling then utter optimism. I'll take neither for myself, but I'd rather have blind optimists around then blind pessimists.

[Kurald Galain]

You don't like how 4th edition might be? Don't talk about it, talk about whatever edition you are playing. Peace among the factions really is that simple.

You're way off base here. The problem lies in people who, if you don't fully agree with them, will assume you hold the diametrically opposed opinion. There are just a handful of vocal 4E fans who continually make this assumption.

That is, people like me who appreciate the general idea of 4E but have concerns about some of the details, are quickly pigeonholed into "OMG!!1! thees idoits haet 4E!!!@!", and then asked to quit talking about it.

Peace is really as simple as understanding the other side.

[Zincorium]

You're way off base here. The problem lies in people who, if you don't fully agree with them, will assume you hold the diametrically opposed opinion. There are just a handful of vocal 4E fans who continually make this assumption.

That is, people like me who appreciate the general idea of 4E but have concerns about some of the details, are quickly pigeonholed into "OMG!!1! thees idoits haet 4E!!!@!", and then asked to quit talking about it.

Peace is really as simple as understanding the other side.

If you're getting flamed for, as you say, liking 4E in general but having issues with the details, then I'd like to see where someone who could have been aware of that flamed you. I haven't seen anything similar to that happen myself, but then I don't read most 4E threads anymore.

And I think you're being overly snarky with me when I'm not on the offensive. I didn't say "Unless you're a die-hard 4th ed fan, shut up". I understand that you might have reservations, although I might disagree with whether or not they make a difference to the upcoming edition's playability. If you actually want to read what people post about fourth edition, you have every reason to go and do so.

And from personal experience, understanding the other side (opposite rather than just at a right angle to me) usually just pisses me off more.

[Kurald Galain]

And I think you're being overly snarky with me when I'm not on the offensive.

I didn't mean to imply that I was talking about you personally, because I wasn't.

The sentiment isn't restricted to 4E either, of course. 2E and 3E fans tend to exhibit the exact same behavior. Heck, I was once flamed twice on the same day, once for being "so obviously a 3E fan that I couldn't possibly understand 2E", and once for being "so blatantly involved in 2E that I couldn't dream of understanding 3E"

[KIDS]

Based on the directions seen from WotC during the last few years, including latest 3.5 books and 4E previews, I am immensely looking forward to it and think it will be something great. Cheers!

in particular the things I like:
- rebalancing classes
- less bookkeeping
- killing the Great Wheel
- easier multiclassing
- easier to use monsters
- rebalancing XP system
- relaxing of skills
- relaxing of alignment
- less important magic items
- differentiating weapons
- dragonborn
- lack of bards
- lack of gnomes
- revised dying rules
- revised trap and exploration rules
- removing narcolepsy
- removing ultimate caster

With all respect to Kurald Galain, Lupy nailed it very well in this topic. D&D is one of the rare areas of discussion where when you post something enthusiastic and optimistic you will still be flamed instead of everyone nodding empathically. If it seems like a far-fetched claim, note that I've been reading World of Warcraft's forums and forums discussing global politics including Iraq, for quite some time, and the amount of hostility towards positive opinions was tiny comapred to this. Just my 2cc...

[Rutee]

"- removing narcolepsy"

Narcolepsy?