What's the overall reaction to D&D 4th edition

[wodan46]

Partial Handbook: http://dnd4.com/phb
Other Bits of knowledge: http://dnd4.com/rumors
Sample Lvl 1 Characters
http://dnd4.com/wp-content/uploads/2...in-level-1.pdf
http://dnd4.com/wp-content/uploads/2...is-level-1.pdf
http://dnd4.com/wp-content/uploads/2...ra-level-1.pdf
http://dnd4.com/wp-content/uploads/2...on-level-1.pdf
http://dnd4.com/wp-content/uploads/2...os-level-1.pdf
http://dnd4.com/wp-content/uploads/2...ra-level-1.pdf

What are people's reaction to it?

It seems as though overall 4th edition has streamlined and balanced d&d.

The (at-will)-per-encounter-daily system ensures that the various classes still generally have the same quantity and quality of abilities, despite the vastly divergent nature of them. Healing surges reduces the need for Clerics. Level 1 characters don't die as much. Wizards start out tougher and Fighters end up deadlier. HP isn't as random.

On the streamlined end, leveling generates similar basic save/attack/skill bonuses for all classes while still giving plenty of options on the power side of things. Combat rules have been simplified, as have encounter rules, and a million other things.

Overall, D&D 4th edition can be summarized as follows
Less time: Numbercrunching and Munchkining
More time: Hacknslashing and Roleplaying

[horseboy]

NNNNNOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!! These threads just died! (Runs and hides)

[Zincorium]

I propose that anybody who posts in this makes one post, period, expressing the most basic version of their opinion, and tries not to start a flamewar.

This proposal is on a purely voluntary basis.


I myself am looking forward to it, mostly because the classes will be far more modular, i.e. a striker should be replaceable by any other striker without causing a problem.

Additionally, the reduction in quantity of magic items, the clarification of feats and the conversion of many feats into powers, the elimination of the vast majority of weird elven subspecies, and the way weapons will actually differ from one another.

[Terraoblivion]

So far it has been overwhelmingly positive for me. The game appears simpler to play and to possess more focus on what you do in the game than on trawling through countless sourcebooks to collect a build that will actually fulfill its role.

The increased genre awareness and focus of both fluff and crunch that WotC appears to be going for also seems like a positive step towards finding a guiding principle for development of further material for the system. I also believe that the fluff for the generic setting is better than the pseudo-Greyhawk fluff of 3.x due to being more focused on genre and on usefulness and less on preserving a legacy of decades of material being pilled on top of each other and sedimenting into a sprawling mess that cannot be properly explained in the space available at launch.

[holywhippet]

I'll need to actually play before I can make a judgement call. From what little I've seen I almost worry about it being a bit too generic with classes not having enough variety or having the same kind of stuff but with different names. More to the point, I'm worried that they are taking out a lot of the wierd and wonderful things that spell casters can do.

Other peoples impressions tell me I'm just not looking deep enough and that there's nothing to worry about.

[Hadrian_Emrys]

This far, the system appears to be a lot more balanced and streamlined. Also, the x-ing races look to be a lot of fun to play. The downsides are that that game also appears to be a pen and paper version of an MMO and half-elves still exist along with the pile of nonsense that is their racial bonuses.

[TheOOB]

I have the boxed set pre-ordered on Amazon already. I believe thats saying enough about my opinion on what I have seen.

I'm still a little wary of the skills system, because star wars was pulled off poorly, but I'm more then willing to give it a chance (and even if that sucks, it won't be such a big deal.)

[DementedFellow]

I propose that anybody who posts in this makes one post, period, expressing the most basic version of their opinion, and tries not to start a flamewar.

This proposal is on a purely voluntary basis.


I myself am looking forward to it, mostly because the classes will be far more modular, i.e. a striker should be replaceable by any other striker without causing a problem.

Additionally, the reduction in quantity of magic items, the clarification of feats and the conversion of many feats into powers, the elimination of the vast majority of weird elven subspecies, and the way weapons will actually differ from one another.

Alright, I'll take up your modest proposal.

I see it as a half-hearted money-grab. No amount of polish can hide the fact that WotC likes to invent a new system just to sell books. If anyone doubts me, just look at the Complete series in 2nd Ed, and the Complete series in Third edition. I wouldn't be surprised if there is another Complete series in fourth edition.

Perhaps the most simple reason of all is that my gaming group has decided not to move to 4e. We still have a library and are continuing to amass a library of 3.x material. We even have members who think it is balanced in plenty of aspects. Keep in mind we only have one Munchkin in our group and he usually bungles it up (he thought VoP was the bee's knees).

There we go two simple reasons that explain why I don't plan on moving to fourth edition.

[Rutee]

I propose that anybody who posts in this makes one post, period, expressing the most basic version of their opinion, and tries not to start a flamewar.

This proposal is on a purely voluntary basis.

Seconded.

I'm digging the new edition. It appears to value stuff I value, and agree with how I think things should be run. Also adding abilities and tactical options to the non-magi is <3

It's too bad they went back, seemingly, to making the non-magi non-fantastic, on their face :P

[Corsec1337]

I was the only one in my gaming group who showed positive interest when the announcement came out at GenCon. It was as time rolled on and I listened to the dnd podcasts that I became less enthusatic about it. I had previously had quit WoW over the past summer and was dissapointed when I heard that was what DnD was becoming. The game is becoming more simple to play in the hopes of taking away some of the WoW audience. The DND RPG online is a shame that is only there to suck money out of you with you getting a basic starting set and are to buy expansions to make the online experince flashier. The murder of the Dungeon and the Dragon magazines was disapointing. The moving to an online format further upset me as I enjoyed the table top aspect of the game more than anything else. The lack of preparation and game testing that has gone into the game. The screwing of third party companies (Paizo, Green Ronin) in not releasing the 4th edition stuff so they can't make up some interesting things for GenCon.

Other than that, the best is the fact that 3.5 books are suddenly alot cheaper on Ebay.

[sonofzeal]

I have no complaints about 4e, and I like that they're putting more thought into making characters playable at lvl1 and increasing parallels between magic and melee (which should help balance issues).

I do plan to keep playing 3rd Ed though. I have neither the time nor money to invest in a new system yet, and I rather like 3.5. I prefer to see 4e as a separate product, with a slightly different target market, that merely happens to use the same name. I see 3.5 as more or less complete, and after ToB it's about as balanced as it's ever going to be short of massive houseruling sprees. There's way more than enough classes/PrCs/feats/spells/whatever out there already, and I see no reason to switch any time in the immediate future.

[horseboy]

Well, after chiming in on 4th threads, 4th edition:
I already play Mordheim. I already play Earthdawn. They're two great tastes that just wouldn't taste good together. Kinda like icing a cake with salsa.

[SofS]

There isn't really a general opinion on this matter. It's a bone of contention for many.

Personally, I don't see myself playing it much, which makes my interest fairly theoretical. I think it looks like a well-thought-out approach to a style of gaming that I have little interest in. It seems like a sort of small-scale tabletop wargame in battle and a fairly abstract descriptive game outside of it. It's pretty far from the origins of the game, but that's what OSRIC and used bookstores are for.

Honestly, this whole thing isn't that big a deal rules-wise. Almost everything I've heard of in this new edition was an alternate rule or a splatbook for 3.5. Hopefully, people will be a little more civil about it in the future (on both sides of the issue).

[AslanCross]

My reaction to it is generally positive. Not an overwhelmingly powerful reaction, but positive nonetheless. I like how it seems to be simpler and more streamlined.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

I just got into 3.x. I have no desire to shell out money for 4.0, especially since it looks very bland. I've already spent a bunch of money, and especially with WotC's track record with balance, I have serious doubts about 4.0.

[wodan46]

was wondering why I hadn't seen more 4th edition threads. Did past ones descend into flamewars and get locked?

[AslanCross]

There are a whole bunch. They didn't necessarily become explosive flame wars, but many were rather circular in their arguments for or against it.

Oh yeah, the PHB link is down. :( I wanted to see it too.

[Animefunkmaster]

I propose that anybody who posts in this makes one post, period, expressing the most basic version of their opinion, and tries not to start a flamewar.

Agreed.

First I feel it is too early to tell how streamlined and balanced it is. It appears to have less rolls in some areas more in others (like an are of effect is an attack roll for each target). Combats are supposed to have more rounds but rounds are done quicker. Without getting a full book of info it is almost impossible to say whether it is balanced or not.

I miss 3.5 printing. One thing that has got me excited for 4th is that there hasn't been much 3.5 books (recently) that interest me (Sans Elder Evils). I am opposed to 4th becuase I FEEL it is just a ploy to resell there game. In, what could be, my ignorance I FEEL that that WoTC's marketting of 4e has been trying to appeal to everyone while being a vague on specifics. What I don't understand is why there is such support for 4th when there are dms who freak out about things like Tome of Battle becuase it is broken, when the power level at early levels in 4e is clearly stronger, and the mechanics are more akin to what has been on the ban list of most DMs I have noticed. This is all speculation and feelings, I am most likely still going to play 4e and probably have a lot of fun doing it.

[Douglas]

From everything I've heard, they seem to be fixing almost every issue I have with 3.5. How good a job they actually did remains to be seen, but I'm optimistic about it.

I see it as a half-hearted money-grab. No amount of polish can hide the fact that WotC likes to invent a new system just to sell books. If anyone doubts me, just look at the Complete series in 2nd Ed, and the Complete series in Third edition. I wouldn't be surprised if there is another Complete series in fourth edition.

Of course there will be splatbooks. WotC is a private business and needs to make money, and selling D&D rulebooks is their primary source of income. This does not change that they are genuinely attempting to create the best game they can.

I had previously had quit WoW over the past summer and was dissapointed when I heard that was what DnD was becoming. The game is becoming more simple to play in the hopes of taking away some of the WoW audience.

Why is reducing the amount of number crunching required automatically making the game like WoW? WotC is attempting to build a game founded on solid principles of what is balanced and fun, and Blizzard tried to do the same thing when they made WoW. Of course there will be similarities - the games are close enough in genre that many of those principles will be the same, and adhering to them could not possibly produce any other result - but they will still have plenty of major differences.

The DND RPG online is a shame that is only there to suck money out of you with you getting a basic starting set and are to buy expansions to make the online experince flashier.

D&D Online has nothing to do with 4e.

The moving to an online format further upset me as I enjoyed the table top aspect of the game more than anything else.

Any and all online tools for 4e are entirely optional. They will be there because many people will find them useful and to facilitate play-by-chat for those who can't meet in person, but tabletop gaming will still be the primary focus. Bringing your laptop to the game will only be needed if you want to look things up on it rather than in your hardcopy rulebooks.

The lack of preparation and game testing that has gone into the game.

??? I have no clue where this idea came from.

The screwing of third party companies (Paizo, Green Ronin) in not releasing the 4th edition stuff so they can't make up some interesting things for GenCon.

Perhaps you should read the enworld compilation of 4e information. In particular:

4e publisher support will be released in two phases.

Phase One is for publishers who want access to the 4e rules early. Taking a lesson from software publishers, WotC will be making available an OGL Designers Kit. This gives early access to rules and is offered to any publisher, not just the ones on the conference call. Access to the kit requires a legitimate business license, a signed NDA, and a one-time $5000 fee.

This kit will be available within a matter of weeks, as soon as several legal logistics are complete. It provides three hardcopy pre-publication versions of the three core rule books, copies of the OGL and SRD, and a FAQ. Publishers will continue to receive updates to these rules as changes are made, one in the beginning of February and possibly one in March. Publishers will also receive advance copies of the final rule books. Importantly, publishers who purchase the kit may begin selling product on August 1, 2008 – earlier than other publishers.

Phase Two is free and begins on June 6th, when the OGL goes live. Any publisher can then produce D&D supplements under the OGL, but these cannot be published until January 1, 2009.

Effectively, this means that publishers who pony up the $5000 fee get four months of advance production time for their products, can sell their products at GenCon and Christmas without a whole lot of competition, and have a five month grace period when theirs are the only 4e products available. Publishers who choose not to pay the fee will enter the market at a later date.

[metalbear]

I for one am interested to see how this is going to play out. In fact I was so interested that I bought the boxed set off of Amazon. If it is half as good as I hope it is, I will be quite happy with all of it. So I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

[Kurald Galain]

With so many different tiny bonuses and stacking feats, the new system is certainly a munchkin's dream, and I envision fun times ahead on the charop boards as people try to set records for highest jump, heaviest thrown weapon, and so forth.

Those debates, ultimately, will show whether the game is actually balanced. After all, WOTC has also claimed that third edition was balanced, and the forums proved them wrong. It would make sense for them to publish a "4.5th edition" (by any other name) two or three years from now, which they would claim would fix balance problems with 4.0.

Overall, it looks like an interesting ruleset for a tactical board game.

[Sebastian]

My reaction to 4e.


Yawwwn!!!

I have yet to see a single thing that make me excited or at least interested to it. I hold still some hope for feats and rituals, but they are quickly waning

[Kantolin]

I'm up in the air about it.

A lot of the concepts I've heard are interesting, but a greater amount thus far are awful - particularly their nonreasons for changing a lot of things, which seem to be 'we're changing this because we like screwing with people'.

On a scale of 1 - 10, with 1 being '4e sucks!' and 10 being '4e is perfection incarnate and can do no wrong!, I think I'm a 4. Trying to be hopeful, but getting more and more hesitant with the increasing irritation I see, but willing to give it a shot anyway.

Unless it bombs horribly, it'll be what I'll be psuedo-forced to end up playing anyway.

[Skjaldbakka]

I don't like it, and won't run it, and probably won't play it, but tend to value the storytelling skill of the DM over my issues with a system. Which is to say, if one of the people I know are good DMs ask me to join a 4E game they are running, I would be up to it, including PbP, but I will never buy anything but the PHB. Of course, so far none of the DMs I respect in terms of local people I know have said anything even remotely positive about 4E.

[Morty]

Some things are good, others are bad, I'm not excited about the gameplay style 4ed seems to encourage and the fluff generally sucks. My final decision will depend on if there will be enough good features to outweigh the bad ones.

[Tsotha-lanti]

All the pages are "Suspended due to overtraffic".

Also, if you want to know an "overall reaction", you oughta post a poll. All a regular ol' thread gets you is a bunch of opinions that are drat hard to quantify.

ToB and Star Wars Saga Edition were both immense improvements (Defences instead of saves made a lot of sense to me, and fixing the 1st-level hit point problem was kinda necessary; I also like "X uses per encounter" abilities), and if the 4th edition really is more in that direction, yay. If it goes too far in that direction... eh.

D&D was already a "videogame" RPG, though. I only play it when I want to "play D&D" (or play Dark Sun, or Dragonlance, etc.; all the same thing). The game's a genre in its own right, and you can only play it with D&D rules. If I want to play a story or play a good tabletop RPG, there's plenty of other choices. (Including many better d20 games.)

It makes sense for WotC to go after market created by World of Warcraft (they'd be idiots not to, and I'd rather see them stay in business), but I'm not their target audience at this point. MUSHes over MMORPGs, thanks.

With so many different tiny bonuses and stacking feats, the new system is certainly a munchkin's dream, and I envision fun times ahead on the charop boards as people try to set records for highest jump, heaviest thrown weapon, and so forth.

There's no game system that can't be broken. At least it worked both ways; I certainly can out-optimize my players. The problem with D&D 3.5 is more that it doesn't actually scale; the higher the levels, the bigger the lack of balance. (Fighter 20 VS Full Caster 20?) Epic levels are a nightmare. If the new edition can fix all of that with a system that actually scales, good on it.

[SamTheCleric]

I have 6 of the books on pre order (Core 3, 2 Forgotten realms and the first hardback adventure)... I'll be running the first "Test" table to see if we want to convert.

Overall, I like it and if my gaming group doesnt, I'll continue to play 3.5 with them and start up my own home game with 4e.

[Mr. Friendly]

I like almost everything I have read about 4e - when those links open up, check them out and save a copy for yourselves; if you are undecided, try a playtest game.

Overall though, the most impressive thing to me is everything I have learned since the 4e announcement was made:

If a company makes money selling a product, that company is completely invalidated and forever ruins that product.

That when you have made a spur of the moment decision to hate something, it is better to make up facts to discredit the object of hate, than to just admit that you have a personal dislike for it.

That Hasbro, after purchasing WotC, used a Time Machine to alter D&D from the very beginning, making it the fault of Hasbro and WotC every bad thing that has ever been done in the entire history of D&D.

Game balance is exactly the same thing as a pay-to-play online 3d MMORPG.

[hewhosaysfish]

What's the overall reaction to D&D 4th edition?
Allow me to demonstrate!
*starts pouring petrol over thread and fumbling for matches*

My initial reaction was squeeing with neophilia. I like reading new systems and supplements and analyses thereof, sometimes as much as I actually like playing.
Once I got past that, I was very much attracted by the shiny things that WotC tried to tempt me with.
More cynical minds than mine responded to the shiny things of 4e with the odg adage "If it looks to good to be true..." and dragged my back from the brink of naive fanboysim.
Nevertheless, I still haven't come over to anti-4e side: I'm still keen to see what's new. I will certainly be browsing the 4e rules at the first possible opportunity and (unless this exposes them as truly dire) playing at some point.

For me, the best news in all the hubbub has been that there will be a free SRD for the new edition. A sort of "Try before you buy" option. Very nice.

I like what they've done with the idea of class roles, although they could have taken it a bit further, for me. Maybe they were afraid to change too much at once; maybe they wanted to leave more room for future splatbooks...

I like what they've done with racial progressions, especially axing LA and racial HD.

As for reshuffling the PHB races, I really couldn't care less. Most groups I know of will pick races freely from both the PHB and MM anyway, so nothing will actually change. The "relegation" of gnomes to the MM makes no more odds than moving you keys from the left pocket of your jeans to the right one.

I like what they say they're doing with magic items but I'll wait to see how well that matches up with what they've actually done.

Not sure about the changes to skills, saves and criticals. Hopefully it will be a meaningful improvement, rather than just a gimmick.

The Faerun reshuffle doesn't bother me. The setting, to my group, has never been more than a convenient way for the GM to get out of drawing his own maps and thinking up a name for the king.

[Indon]

I propose that anybody who posts in this makes one post, period, expressing the most basic version of their opinion, and tries not to start a flamewar.

I move to bring the proposal to a vote. Aye!

About 4'th edition, I feel very strong... ambivalence.

On the one hand, I'm looking forward to the way traps will work, the reduction in reliance on magic items, the introduction of racial level progressions to replace the awkward RHD/LA system, and other aspects of the system.

On the other hand, I'm dreading the ability (power) system and its' implications, I dislike some of the measures that were implemented to decrease the impact of the dice in combat, and I'm pretty leery about the skill system, among other things.

Time will tell, but for now, I'm going to agree with Kurald Galain and say that I think 4'th edition D&D is going to turn out to be a very good tactical boardgame.