Well this is technically book stuff because it's about the new core rulebooks for DnD 4th edition. Anyone else ever play, because I read the new rules and it kinda sucks. I wanna hear what other people think so far. Granted I havn't given it a full run through but that may never happen. Anyone who's played both please voice your thoughts!
I don't play frequently, but I do know how much fun tabletop games are so I play whenever a chance arrives. But 4.0 is totally aimed towards being more like an mmorpg played online. Alignment has more or less gone way of the dodo with only 5 options left (maybe I wanna be lawful evil or chaotic good or any of the other 5 cut out). Rangers don't even get animal companions anymore! I mean come on. No true multi-classing (so I can't build a 20th character equivalent to a 19th level wizard and a 14th lvl fighter/ranger). It seems to be less options and more likely for people to min-max rather than roleplay....*Sigh* guess just some drunken World of Darkness for myself....
I haven't gotten my hands on 4.0 yet, but I did play 3 and 3.5!
I've played for about six years.
C/G was cut out! I'm always C/G! Why was C/G cut out? Dx
I don't want my dnd streamlined! I want tons of options. Taking out options makes it harder to get into character, of course, maybe the DMs will house rule shit in or out of the rules. Sigh.
I need to get into another group.
The only way I see options to be maximised is to go with a World of Darkness rules system where the rules are very simple so maximum chance for story and actions to take in the story, or maximise rules and details in order to distinguish not just players but their characters and abilities. Long gone is the day of a chaotic neutral bard....bards aren't even in the core rulebooks. Nor are barbarians or well anything!
My dnd friends told me they played with the new system and that it was amazingly well. I can't yet comment, as I still haven't ( D:< ), but I'm still nervous about what I've heard of it. I'd love my RPing, but I think in 3.5 there were tons of great opportunities for that, it all depended on the DM.
I can't comment on your WoD talk there..I don't know anything about WoD. :o
Because they are Jews! No, I don't know why but they are no longer core classes. They'll most likely be released in later books, but its all a ploy of wizards of the coast. When they started designing 4th they ramped up the release of material for 3.5, but in smaller amounts than normal. They did the same thing with 2nd edition, but I wasn't a player at the time. Also the 4th core books are much smaller than 3.5 core rulebooks. I forsee all the new rulebooks to be smaller than 3.5 but of course just as pricy.....lame.
You know, one thing that pisses me off with American course litterature (IE the books we read in school) is that they're stuffed with irrelevant information (makeing the books all but impossible to reread, which decreases learnability, makeing the books worse). This is because American authors get payed per page. By slimming down the rules they make the gameplay easier which means you'll have to spend less time on combat and stuff like that, meaning you get to spend more time on the things that matters (like roleplaying). So, by slimming down the book they make it better. Isn't it then reasonable to not lower the price? Or do you really want another 200 pages filled with fill out material?
The main gripe that I've heard of with #3rd is that its too complex. I stuck with 2nd because my DM (coincidentally my father) liked it better. Apparently 3rd "left no time to play", whatever that means. Did anyone else feel this way? Does 4th improve on that at all?
4th is supposed to uber streamline the rules to leave more time to play. I felt once you got into the style of 3rd you could boogy along pretty good and their were so many possible surprises. You never knew what a character or enemy was capable.
In the end 4th probably brings it back to be more like 2nd, so your DM may be into that.