They have certainly gotten me interested in D&D again.  I like the talk of streamlining the system.  Quicker play is ALWAYS a plus.  About the only thing that gives me pause at the moment is the talk of races and the changes to monsters.  I liked that in 3E I could get the PC stats from the monster block, it sounds like with PC racial abilities spread out through the levels and the changes coming to monsters that that won't be nearly as easy to do in 4E.

Quote from: CalithenaJ Arcane, what did you play before 3e came out? I mean, lots of stuff probably, but what was your go-to game?

oWoD mainly actually, especially the LARP variety.

Cool. That puts you in the alternative-mainstream at least, so you have some right to wear that hat.

I had you pegged for a GURPS man, and I was going to lay down the hammer on you for thinking you were mainstream in that case. Glad to see I was wrong.

You're still being kind of a pain in the ass about all this though. Given that they "have" (for money reasons) to design a new edition that differs in at least a few substantial ways from the old, what would you have preferred them to change instead?

Quote from: CalithenaCool. That puts you in the alternative-mainstream at least, so you have some right to wear that hat.

I had you pegged for a GURPS man, and I was going to lay down the hammer on you for thinking you were mainstream in that case. Glad to see I was wrong.

You're still being kind of a pain in the ass about all this though. Given that they "have" (for money reasons) to design a new edition that differs in at least a few substantial ways from the old, what would you have preferred them to change instead?

I do think GURPS 3e was a nifty system, but I seldom got much actual play experience.

Really, I'm perfectly happy with 3.x.  Hell, I was a bit reluctant to accept 3.5 even, and I still think it was largly unnecessary.

Any changes I made would probably be pretty minor.  Fixing the half-orc maybe, or putting the Warlock in the main book as a core class.  Probably ditch the Paladin and maybe the Ranger because I think they're just badly implemented, and their archetypes are served just fine by existing classes.  

By and large though, I can't think of much, and I'd be perfectly happy playing 3.x for the rest of my gaming life, which may well happen.

I'm cautiously optimistic but there's obviously contradicting information out there, such as regarding multiclassing.

I like the goals they have set for the design but I think the claim this will be a much streamlined D&D are the usual bullshit. They say that about every edition and it always turns out to be the opposite.

4th edition will be the usual clunky, extra-detailed but ultimately endearing mess of a game with piles of rules.

Above all, the reason I really like what I hear so far is that it seems they are continuing to refine the main purpose this game was built for: mindless hack n' slash, dungeoncrawling and the like. One good example is the way they talk about skills. If it's not for encounters, it's ditched or fusioned. And since the game is D20, they'll still get all the numbnuts who desperately want to believe the game can accomodate any style of play, any genre and any setting. So we'll still see plenty of useless 3rd party products such as the craptacular Dynasties and Demagogues to catter to the delusional.

The key here will be whether the execution will match the intent. The goals are fine but I'm not particularly impressed by the names behind this fourth edition. It's a far cry from Jonathan Tweet, to name one. The funny thing is, a hack like Mearls was probably a good choice when looking at the current field. I mean, guys like him, Ron Edwards, Luke Crayne and a few others are considered the cream of the crop (although having different styles) and that speaks volumes about the state of the industry. WotC had a lot more choices when it came to 3rd edition but there really aren't that many great modern designers right now. Most of the cutting edge stuff (such as Forge games) is interesting in intent but ultimately crappy. Out of all the talentless pro writers out there, Mearls wins by default due to his unimpressive but vast experience with D20.

I'm really hoping a new generation of writers and designers emerge between now and 5th edition, so WotC can boldly redesign the game, such as they did between 2nd and 3rd edition. 4th edition looks more like a cleaned up, extensively playtested 3rd edition.

On the electronic portion: I'm glad they are going that direction but man, are they late on this one. It looks like D&D's ultimate edition will be the 5th one, which should probably be out in 2012 or 2013 and really take advantage of computers. What they are presenting here should have been fully functional in 2001.

Pretty much uninterested, and not really very informed yet, but since this is the Internet I get to vote on my gut, and the stuff about superpower moves for fighters (which reminds me of nothing so much as videogame beat-em-up button combos) is a turnoff.

Pretty neutral right now - I don't know enough about it yet to make a decision one way or another.

Besides, even though I've inherited copies of 3.5, I'm still bitter about 3.0 being dumped as quickly as it was.  Well, maybe bitter isn't the right word...perhaps 'gunshy'?  This time I may wait until they come out with 5th Edition so I can just buy the 4th Edition Rules Compendium and see how it all turned out.  :haw:

Quote from: AkrasiaSeriously, I like what is being said about 'streamlining' the system, making prep work less of a chore, making the game move more quickly (especially combat)...

If they can honestly pull this off, I'd be interested.  I'm pretty sick of half-page stat blocks.  Simple NPC/Monster stats and fast-moving combat resolution - those are the two most important things to me in an RPG these days, and have been for the past five years.  But given that fact, I could just stick with my print-out of Core Elements or maybe pick up that Castles & Crusades game all the cool kids are all talking about...

I'm not liking much of what we've heard so far about 4e, but I'll concede that I'm not the target audience.  They lost me with 3.0.

Don't you have to wait until you've read or even played a game before bitching about or praising it? Or at least until it's been published and someone else has read or played it? Or have we turned into rpg.net?

I'm optimistic, but only because I've liked Mearls' stuff in the past, and because I'm hoping they'll fix some of the problems of 3.x D&D. I'm reserving judgment until it actually comes out though.

Quote from: Kyle AaronDon't you have to wait until you've read or even played a game before bitching about or praising it? Or at least until it's been published and someone else has read or played it? Or have we turned into rpg.net?

Look at the title of the thread. It's asking what peoples opinions are so far, based on the nuggets of information Wizards have deemed fit to be revealed.

Right now I'm pretty excited. The potential applications of the cited source material could be interesting and fun. The streamlining and intent to reduce prep time is music to my ears. Of course there's no way that I'll know anything for sure until I own the books, but I'm enjoying the speculation based on what's been offered up.

Pfft. There is no "so far." It's ridiculous. But don't worry, when blokes are young, lots of them have trouble with premature speculation. Less of a problem when you've matured a bit.

Quote from: Kyle AaronDon't you have to wait until you've read or even played a game before bitching about or praising it? Or at least until it's been published and someone else has read or played it? Or have we turned into rpg.net?

Fuck me!
 
This is the internet.  Since when has the truth ever got in the way of speculation and bitching?

Quote from: Kyle AaronPfft. There is no "so far." It's ridiculous. But don't worry, when blokes are young, lots of them have trouble with premature speculation. Less of a problem when you've matured a bit.

You were so close to making sense, but then you tried negate the entire concept of speculation in an attempt to place yourself in a more mature bracket than the people posting to this thread.

That's highschool stuff, mate. Get off your high horse and try indulging other peoples fun. I know you don't have much to say about D&D, but trying to drum up yet another defintional debate based on exclusory tactics only reflects badly on you.

They say that thinking of baseball stats helps stop you shooting off too soon.