Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Eh, priorities in life. I always enjoyed D&D but it's a hell of a time sink. In terms of enjoyment per hour there's better ways to spend my limited free time.

When we moved from 3.5 to 4th edition most of us thought it was a refreshing change -- the rules seemed much less cumbersome but after about a year or so we became bored with 4th ed (since the characters are so "samey") so we decided to take a break from RPGs.

We are currently thinking about trying Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay 3rd edition but haven't started yet

Please post a detailed review when you do start, duncana. I'm very interested to see what your group thinks.

For me D&D 4th and 3rd Ed have many similarities and only one big difference.

They're similar because they both have the same potential for role play, but you have to do it, don't rely on books and dice to do it for you.

They're different in the area of combat. 3rd Edition rules treat combat like a simulation, while 4th Edition rules treat combat very much like a game.

I play in two games, one 3.5 and one 4th Ed. I like both. I originally refused to play 4th Ed, because I had so many 3.5 books and resented WOTC not supporting 3.5 anymore. Then I gave 4th Ed a go. I didnt like it, which just confirmed my preconceptions about the game.

Then earlier this year some friends wanted to learn the game, and it was too hard to track down 3.5 players handbooks for them, so we played 4th. And I surprised myself. I enjoyed it. Having given 4th Ed a decent go this time and with a different attitude I now appreciate the differences and enjoy the similarities. I just needed more time to understand that its not about the rules, its about the people you have fun with. I still love my 3.5 game, but now I also love playing with my 4.0 group.

I like 4E.

If nothing else, the new rules made it easy to pitch to my boardgaming buddies. What if they didn't like role-playing? Well, then worse case scenario is they have some fun killing monsters.

They liked it, and so we had some fun with 4E. 4E combat is a game, but I like games, and I don't think it intrudes or interferes with role-playing. Maybe if you had a really dark and gritty setting where combat should be feared and lethal, 4E isn't your system. But other than that, you should be fine.

The more I hear about 4E, the less I like.

Though, to be fair, I'd really have to see it in action to be able to accurately and fairly render my Final Judgment*.

*That's one of my special powers.

Alpharius wrote:The more I hear about 4E, the less I like.

Though, to be fair, I'd really have to see it in action to be able to accurately and fairly render my Final Judgment*.

*That's one of my special powers.

this is a 4E game. looks just like D&D. BTW this is our local group. The picture is a little old but yeah.

wow, the bearded hat guy is channeling some serious 1940's and civil war timetravelling mashup vibe...

@alph,

definitely try it out. most people seem to either love or hate it (with few in between). give it a try before sinking $$ into it.

warboss wrote:wow, the bearded hat guy is channeling some serious 1940's and civil war timetravelling mashup vibe...

@alph,

definitely try it out. most people seem to either love or hate it (with few in between). give it a try before sinking $$ into it.

lol that's Brett. I'm the dude sitting beside him scratching my head. I was like really really tired that day so yeah.

I don't like 4e. But then that's partially due to me being a Dragon subscriber who was left holding the bag by WotC when they forced that publication to be closed in favor of an ezine.

The other part was due to me not liking how it's played. I LIKED the ability to really customize my character. Now we have cookie cutter builds.

BaronIveagh wrote:I don't like 4e. But then that's partially due to me being a Dragon subscriber who was left holding the bag by WotC when they forced that publication to be closed in favor of an ezine.

The online Dragon/Dongeon are actuly useful alot of the time.

The other part was due to me not liking how it's played. I LIKED the ability to really customize my character. Now we have cookie cutter builds.

Now that alot of the suplements have come out the "Cookie Cutter" has gone away.
I know a lot of the power Mechanicaly work simalar, but to me that is one of the strengths now. No more is the 20th Level Mage doing 20d6 while the 20th Level fighter does 1d8+15.

BI makes a good point not yet mentioned on Dakka. I think the biggest, legitimate, remaining complaint about the 4E takeover is that the magazines got canned. Ezine just doesn't cut it, IMO.

... yes, and at 25-40 dollars a supplement, you too, can play the characters you used to play right out of the box!

Tell them what they've won Johnny!

You've won a fabulous antique bridge! Situated in Brooklyn, New York, New York, this one of a kind stone and steel landmark is the perfect site for a vacation getaway!

But that's not all!

We're tossing in the patented Midas Limestone Exanguinator! This jiffy product is used by WotC executives the world over to get just a little bit more of your money while telling you what a deal your getting! Got a product that's not worth the paper it's printed on to move? Don't sweat it! The Limestone Exsanguinator can take a coveted brand name and apply it to your worthless scrap, driving millions of unrepentant morons to buy it!

Edit: I will never, ever, ever, forgive WotC for destroying Dragon. I will continue to buy Pathfinder from now on. People say that you have to vote with your wallet. I'm practicing what I preach.

Manchu wrote:BI makes a good point not yet mentioned on Dakka. I think the biggest, legitimate, remaining complaint about the 4E takeover is that the magazines got canned. Ezine just doesn't cut it, IMO.

I'm still pissed about that one. I would love to get a in print magazine back.

I also miss the magazines. Don't see why they couldn't have had a magazine AND a website subscription service.

BaronIveagh wrote:... yes, and at 25-40 dollars a supplement, you too, can play the characters you used to play right out of the box!.

It was like that when 3rd came out.

One of things that got me to change philosophies was this Question

What it a Character Sheet?















It is a physical representation of your Character that you envision in a mathematical formula to be used with a specific set of rules.

That is how I started to look at things. When I write or rewrite a character in 4e I don’t look at the mechanics of the power, I read the fluff first and see if that fits the character and then look at the mechanics. I have had to make some changes with converting. I have a Cleric that is now a Paladin, A Cat-Girl Samaria that is now a Razorclaw Shifter Rouge and a Bard who was into martial arts that is now a monk.

Sometimes you need to stand back and look at a character and go what is the most appropriate.

The people I play with, still play 3.5, though we really don't get to p lay often, sadly.

I haven't tried 4th yet, but I'm willing to give it at least a fair try before I give it my verdict.

Trickster wrote:For me D&D 4th and 3rd Ed have many similarities and only one big difference.

They're similar because they both have the same potential for role play, but you have to do it, don't rely on books and dice to do it for you.

That's something most people seem to miss. Most RPG set ups aren't there to do the roleplaying for you. They exist to give a framework and mechanic for character development while providing hard and fast impartial rules to resolve situations like combat, bluffing, picking locks, etc. without simply say, "I want to pick this lock," and then waiting to see if the GM will let you.

Da Boss wrote:I also miss the magazines. Don't see why they couldn't have had a magazine AND a website subscription service.

Because according to Paizo when they asked WotC asked the same question, Dragon was 'too much content for the cover price".

Given how much all the RPGs sell for (including Pathfinder stuff), I believe WotC may have had a good point. Trouble is, of course, that the magazine content was pretty hit or miss. Some of it was amazing . . . a lot was not so amazing. I think I miss the art more than anything. Even as an e-zine the art does not seem to have decline. If anything, I'd say it's done better than the rather ugly 4E books.

... given how many of the better artists that WotC has driven away since the old days of M:tG that's not a surprise...