Dungeons and Dragons 4th Edition

[clockworkcanary]

I'm surprised I haven't seen this topic yet.  The 4th edition of Dungeons and Dragons was just released last month, relatively soon after 3 and 3.5.  Some say it's a good game but it's not D&D.  Some seem to hate its video game like "boxed in" qualities; others seem to like it.

I have been reading it off and on for the last couple of weeks (even made a test character) and I must admit, I'm not that excited.  I do like a couple changes like saving throws becoming like AC in defense and certain attacks being based on an attribute rather than an attack bonus, and action powers.  I also think the at-will, once-per encounter, and once-per day powers are ok, but other changes I don't care for at all.

First of all, everything seems dumbed down.  I mean, I understand trying to market to new players (that's how they make money) but some changes seem nonsensical.  I mean, why would INT affect your reflex save?  Sure you could bend over backwards to justify it, but then that's a minor gripe anyway.  How about fixed Hit Points? 

And this whole x per encounters a day.  I'm not sure about anyone else, but often times, one encounter bleeds into another.  Other times, an encounter isn't so cookie-cutter like they've made it.  Now there are elite monsters, standards, and minions.  And a lot of people are upset about the rest=HP reset. 

I myself am more concerned with the boxed in roles for everyone.  You know, if I wanted to play Everquest, I would just log on and play it.  Most of us play D&D for a different kinda game.  You now have to force your character role into one of 4 roles predefined rather than customize your own.  Sure, most characters fell into one of those roles, but now it's more like you're forced into it. 

The wizard, my favorite class (and this is why it's my biggest gripe) has been converted from a mass artillary and utility unit into a crowd-controlling Enchanter from Everquest.  Oh, and we're also boxed in to use one of two types of Implements.  Yes I know we're still an artillary piece but to a lessar extent and still have some utility but it's not the same class at all. 

Anyway, I like the updates to some of the mechanics for sure; not sure about some of the others though.  I don't like the whole WOW/Everquest mimicing too much.  I think I'll play some 4ed characters but will stick with DMing 3.5 for awhile.  Who knows, I may feel different after playing a few more games.

What are your thoughts?

[Zapranoth]

I've bought the PH and have been unsuccessfully trying to read it.

v4 is completely, utterly uninspiring.  It looks technically clean, but trying to read these rules, I get the impression that the book is protected by a "glyph of uninteresting-ness" or some such.  They made the game too technically clean and dumbed down.

I will never play v4, and I think it sucks.  I'm keeping v3.5.

I would love to hear a v4 apologist, and I'll admit I haven't even been able to finish the 4th ed rules because they are so tedious and uninspiring.

[Cult Movie Mania]

Man, I miss D&D.  I used to play it in the somewhat early days ('79-'82 approx.).  Unfortunately, as one grows up, it gets harder to find serious players as real life takes over.  Used to play Traveler, Call of Cthulhu, and Gamma World too.  Some of the most fun times of my life was playing RPG's

[darthchicken]

I'm currently in a big game of 4th, and so far the only problem I have with it is the lack of bards. Other than that, I really enjoy it. I play a fighter, and they play a lot differently than 3rd. It took a while to get used to it, but it's fun.

[Saucerman]

Read some of it.  Found it to be massively uninteresting and almost painfully dumbed down.  For D&D, I'll stick to 3.5. 

For RPGs in general, gimme mah Call of Cthulhu.  I run a mean CofC game, even have players from my last campaign asking when I'm starting another one.