Grimjack Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 Were playing 3.5 now, and I think our group is another in the wait and see line. It sounds interesting, but does it justify the costs. Plus our DM is not afraid to tweak the rules that don't work so well..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankthedm Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 There is more than enough stuff in 3E that I disagree with pretty majorly, [especially suppliment material] so I look forward to see how 4E shapes up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Froggy the Great Posted October 31, 2007 Moderator Share Posted October 31, 2007 Sticking with Savage Worlds, don't see the point of 4.X. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoshi Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 My group is taking the wait & see attitude. We have invested too much money in the 3/3.5 system (and 3rd party munchkin splat books) to waste our money in a change, since 3rd edition has not even been out that long. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spiritual_exorcist Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 I'll buy the core books, I like a good chunk of what I see coming out of 4th edition, but there are some things I'm seriously peeved about (The dumping of many of the classic races and classes in favor new ones being my least favorite change). I'm taking a wait and see, but WOTC will very likely get my money for the core books at the very least. 50% of the changes i'm hearing about seem fairly cool, the big problem is i'm very opposed to about 25% of what they are proposing, so I don't know. Still I dropped from D&D in 2nd edition, and 3rd brought me back. 3.5 was a bit annoying, but ultimately in many respects made the game better. Core product 3.5 is a great game in my opinion, beyond that, alot of the supplement material is garbage. SO I'm hoping 4th provides a better game with the seemingly radical changes in alot of departments. Still I hate Tieflings...dropping Gnomes in favor of them just sucks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ironworker Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 I never even got into 3.5 and I'd really like to get away from WOTC products. I'm even considering switching back to WEG for Star Wars either that or I'm just going to start looking for some very flexible generic rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tabascojunkie Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 either that or I'm just going to start looking for some very flexible generic rules. HERO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Kutz Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 Much like everything that WoTC has done - I will avoid it like the plague. It seems that they have set out to create a new rules set which is explicitly incompatible with the current version. As someone who goes way back with TSR and D&D, the original booklets were compatible with AD&D, which was compatible with AD&D 2nd Ed. - all with minor fudges in the numbers. For that matter, it was fairly compatible with most other game systems that used a 20 sided dice for combat resolution (there are only so many ways that you can handle that). But, they have said that the new version contains too many changes and it would be too complicated to create a conversion booklet. I just hope that when Wizards screws the pooch on this, they don't bury the franchise in Hasbro's vault and sell it off to a company who actually enjoys the games and is less interested in releasing a new version of rules every third year. The only thing I am looking forward to with 4E coming out is the likelihood of getting a few of the more interesting books that they put out for 3.5 at the used book store - plus game/book stores dumping their entire product lines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dyelan Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 Unisystem all the way. Tried 3.0, but I will not keep re-buying the same books. Anthony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matsumoto Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 True 20, Savage Worlds...hmmm, maybe i'll poke around abit, and see whazzup... oh, i RECLAIMED my old tag at WotC and was able to get in the DnD Insider....err, they are beign cryptic on 4th ed content, but it sounds like they are heading on the same road they are now, with a few things to freshen up. also, i say the four classes thing won'rt last long: expect to see monks, barbarians, and bards released in a supplement you can buy to get thsoe classes... money scheme, if you ask me!! oh well, True roleplayers are non-conformist socialites! so, dont expect me to conform.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gus Landt Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 I migrated from 1st to 2nd, from 2nd to 3rd, from 3rd to 3.5. The day 4th comes out, I'll migrate to it, too. From everything I've read about 4th edition, I'm really excited about it! There is so much awesome stuff they're doing, I want to start using it now! As for the money aspect, I have never played with anything but the core rulebooks. I've been playing weekly for 25 years, and never felt the need for all the extra books. YMMV. A few facts some people might not know: 1) If you have a local group you get together with, you don't need to worry about all the online stuff. WOTC has stated that the online component is to the game what the Special Features disc is to a DVD movie - just extras for those interested. It is a way to play with a group of non-local players who you can't get together with physically. 2) There will be no compatibility with 3rd/3.5. All your 3e books will not be compatible with 4th, so take that into consideration. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon Snack Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 I would like to take a wait and see attitude, but I've also been checking out the previews. I could be missing fingers and still be able to count on one hand the things that I'm hearing that I like... It's obvious from paying attention to the previews that they haven't even worked everything out yet. First Gnomes were gone, now apparently Gnomes may be back in (or that may just be another hamfisted attempt to placate people - since they won't actually confirm anything because "nothing's official" blah, blah, blah...). They ripped on the 3.x Grapple rules in the 4dventure announcement, but we haven't heard what the new Grapple rules will be. I've played quite a few systems and Grapple has always been a rules oddity (and the 3.x Grapple rules actually aren't that bad, other than some corner cases), so if they want to prove that it's better in 4.0 they should show us. 3.x may not be perfect, but it looks like 4.0 may have a whole new set of 'issues'. I will never play 4.0 ('class roles' is the deal breaker for me), but I may still DM it (perhaps a fine distinction, but a large enough one for me). However, the majority of my group is very anti-4.0, so barring any changes we will be sticking with 3.x (there's still plenty of stuff that I haven't even touched on). It's that or just take another break from D&D (like during 2E). I have plenty of other systems I can play and I actually think my D&D group would like Savage Worlds better. Speaking of which, I don't see my Savage Worlds group switching to 4.0 either... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Tiger Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 with 3.x (there's still plenty of stuff that I haven't even touched on). That's a great point, I havnt really even touched the planes let alone Epic adventures in 3.0. Our group has characters ranging from levels 14 to 18 ATM and I have only sent them into the Abyss twice! I had a third trip planned but an overzelous party cleric attacked a planar gate guardian which turned out to be a great wyrm blue dragon disguised as an Egyptian style priestess, and got the party rogue waxed in the ensuing fight, the party paladin was so distraught she assaulted the cleric and left the party and is questioning her faith uh-oh(all roleplayed of course) so now the party must find her and convince her to return to the party before a renegade solar unleashes an apocaliptic monster upon the realm and and... well as you say so much still to do... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruunwald Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 When 3.5 came, I grudgingly snapped stuff up, as I still felt the strange need to remain "current." It ended up causing a lot of grief in my group, since others were too cheap to upgrade, and conflicts over spell definitions, minor rules, etc. would pop up for a long while. I don't want to see that again. Now, I am over the notion that I need to subscribe to some "authority" in order to feel validated in my game-playing. More to the point, there are plenty of us in the world who seem to be better at designing or customizing a system than Wizards is. Which brings me to the real point of why I won't be going 4th; which is that Wizards doesn't seem to have anything truly creative up their collective sleeve. And, as such, they are becoming in my mind increasingly less relevant. To clarify that, I mean that it's been so long since something original and exciting or inspiring has come from them, I can't help but feel that the constant releasing of errata and completely revised rules systems is a stand-in for a complete lack of creativity. All due respect to the Open License thing and to the third party adventure idea, but if Wizards wants to inspire confidence and boost sales, I think they should concentrate on good storytelling supplements, adventures, original and more cutting edge source books, etc. Things like a 4th Edition and the growing minis line (more rules to tinker with and distract) seem to indicate that Wizards is lazy or loathe to worry about actual creative content. Rules are easy to mess with, and it's easy to get people to spend money by "updating" them. Creating an interesting hook is much harder. I guess I'm saying I don't think they try very hard. If they can't try hard enough to care about the game or where it came from, then I guess I don't think they deserve me caring about their product. I can run a great game without them, so why not do so? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spiritual_exorcist Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 I will never play 4.0 ('class roles' is the deal breaker for me) I'm waiting to see just how defined said class roles are, likewise whether multi-classing will remain flexible enough to allow me to make the type of character I want (whether it be in a min-maxing combat sense, or more importantly a Roleplaying and creative sense, which is one thing that 3.X had over previous editions, alot of variety in what you could play and what kind of options you had. For example, I love playing the honey-tongued Nobleman Rogue/Fighter or Bard/Fighter who pushed all his skill and feats into Interaction skills (Diplomacy, Bluff, Sense Motive etc), yet had enough combat prowess to back up his threats and promises). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.