To be honest most of the negative views about 4e actually make me want to try it if only to see how wrong they really are.

Quote from: Broken-Serenity;386520To be honest most of the negative views about 4e actually make me want to try it if only to see how wrong they really are.

It's the only D&D I haven't played (or ran)...but I have read it, and I really didn't see anything in it that made me want to invest any further time into it than that, personally.

The story here is that D&D garnered media attention without the need for a pillar of the industry dying, not that there are angry people on the internet who feel the need to share their opinion.

Quote from: Pete;386522The story here is that D&D garnered media attention without the need for a pillar of the industry dying, not that there are angry people on the internet who feel the need to share their opinion.

I really doubt that DnD encounters somehow managed to draw media attention on its own; the whole of the article read more like ad copy than a human interest piece.

I started playing a 4e game last Sunday (had a really good time, btw). I found it interesting that when I pulled out my PHB to look something up, I was advised by the DM and others (who have been using 4e far longer) that it was useless now since it had been "errata'd" so much. Apparently they keep updating and changing the abilities, classes, and rules often enough that the only way to keep really current is to use their on-line resources.

Point? None, really, except I find it funny that a "core book" is now essentially useless (to this group at least). Also, I cannot fathom trying to run this game "off the cuff" - it seems to require encounters to be heavily scripted in advance, based on levels and whatnot. I could be wrong, though.

Quote from: Werekoala;386527Point? None, really, except I find it funny that a "core book" is now essentially useless.

Maybe we'll see a digital-only edition some time in the future, with a purely subscription based model, maybe with some POD on the side. Who knows.

I think they're exaggerating the uselessness of the core PHB.

Exalted still has more errata than 4e, and the corebook served me fine for that game.

QuoteMaybe we'll see a digital-only edition some time in the future, with a purely subscription based model, maybe with some POD on the side. Who knows.

I would be okay with that, especially since I play 4e as a casual endeavor or as a pick-up game.  Not having to invest in actual books would be nice.

Im only interested in the game at the moment because the essentials line is due and it'll work out abit cheaper to buy into than all the books i'd need to run it using the current line.  If i end up sticking with 4e im probably gonna subscribe to ddi instead of buying the main books though as i have far to many unused rpg books in my spare room and a huge chunk of those are previous editions of d&d.

I haven't bought anything of 4e other than the core set.  You don't need it unless you really want some of the fluff, since DDI provides the rest.

Also, you can subscribe to DDI for a single month and get all of the content and updates available, and then unsubscribe and keep all of that content, since the files are stored locally on your computer.

Quote from: Aos;386486Comic book letters pages too.

Amusingly, the first time I ever read any commentary from Darren MacLennan (RPG.net's sow of a thousand needle-tooth-bitten teats), it was in the letters column in the back of a comic book.

!i!

I only got through slightly more than half of the aprox 260 comments there before I decided it wasn't worth my time and skimmed the rest, but they were all generally positive.

What I find ironic is that all but a handful of the negative comments I read were in regards to how 4e wasn't 3.5e and not the hobby itself, because the whole point of the 'explorer' editions is to 'lure back' people who left the hobby

I was lured back in by 3.0. Although I never played it, it did rekindle my interest and led to me finding some other games that suited me better.

Quote from: chaosvoyager;386549I only got through slightly more than half of the aprox 260 comments there before I decided it wasn't worth my time and skimmed the rest, but they were all generally positive.

What I find ironic is that all but a handful of the negative comments I read were in regards to how 4e wasn't 3.5e and not the hobby itself, because the whole point of the 'explorer' editions is to 'lure back' people who left the hobby

Exactly.  I can't see where everyone is seeing the huge nerd-rage fuelled flame war in that article.  tBP can only dream of having that easy of a time with moderation.

I don't kike D&D, any edition and don't play it. I also do not go on and on about my dislike of it or feel a need to convince others to dislike it.

Maybe I'm secure enough in my opinions not to feel a compulsion to validate them by trying to browbeat others into agreeing with them...

Quote from: Angry_Douchebag;386523I really doubt that DnD encounters somehow managed to draw media attention on its own; the whole of the article read more like ad copy than a human interest piece.

I skimmed but it did read like that.  CNN has sunk quite a bit in the last couple of years.  I've noticed a few articles that were opinion pieces from people who just happened to have a book coming out.  They also try to pass blog entries as news.