I have met the grognard and he is me

[artbroken]

Anyone interested in roleplaying games (and anyone not interested in RPGs probably should find a better LJ to follow, to be honest) would have heard the news last week that, roughly three years after releasing the 4th edition of Dungeons and Dragons, Wizards of the Coast/Hasbro is gearing up to release a new edition in the next 12-18 months,

Comments

[ashamel]

Not quite sure I'm into 4th ed -- 98 sessions in and I still haven't run a successful Skill Challenge -- but I'm really not keen on following the roller coaster yet again.

[mrteufel]

Looks like it's time to buy that Rules Compendium before What-See pull the plug on the 4e DDI.

[barrington]

I knew I would agree with this post. I feel exactly the same, though my history is different. I didn't start with D&D (my first two RPG experiences were with Advanced Fighting Fantasy and Paranoia), I've never been into it that much, I generally play it because that's the easiest thing to get players to play. But I too like 4E for all the same reasons as you; it's probably my favourite edition (though I also really like one of the 3E derivatives, and no, it's not Pathfinder). I am sad to see it get such a short run; even assuming the next edition or whatever doesn't come out for another year or two, it's still only getting half the love of previous editions (I'm deliberately ignoring 3.5; the Essentials line was the equivalent, and for all the fuck-aboutery, that was way less disruptive to the material that had come before than 3.5 was

[damien_wise]

Thinking about the rules and game balance...
Fans are fond of the first edition because it was the original (okay okay, it's cos it wan't Basic D&D); liked the complexity and choice of 2nd ed and all those spin-offs, but hated the way it didn't fix many of the problems of its predecessor; barfed all over 3rd ed for introducing so much overhead, and grudgingly played 3.5 because it finally got a grip on the D20 thing. 4th ed is their best and most polished by a long shot. It fixes a lot of problems the previous editions had, makes the game more consistent, and is in no way looking long in the tooth. What major changes would you make? Other than to drum-up more sales? Could it be that WotC need regular turnover of customers/editions/supplements to keep the money rolling in?

PS: hey, don't diss the Gelatinous Cube! I'll have you know that the D&D5E setting, Cubeland, is crawling with Gelatinous Cubes, and is so not a MineCraft rip-off.

[pete23]

I loved 2nd edition. It was so mundane and balanced.

Erm... Probably compared to 1st edition.

Dear Oriental Adventures Monk Class,

Billy no longer wishes to play with you as your special abilities drastically unbalance his game.

Love,

Tiamat (relegated to Ba'atezu or something - bring back the Gods!)

[ashamel]

I liked 2nd ed too.

Although I do seem to recall making a huge Access database with spells to assign to NPCs. I was obviously more keen in the old days.

[bruceb]

I'm playing catching up, but...right on, Patrick.

For me, for instance, 4e is the only edition of D&D that ever had a whole mess of magic-using classes I'd like to play, or run for. 3e started getting there with variant systems in Unearthed Arcana and various 3rd-party books, but 4e casters are what I wanted back in 1977 dammit. (I see your bold-face and raise you some wasted italics.) Really, given either a cap on feats to match the cap on powers or the simple courage to toss out feats altogether, 4e would be perilously close to my non-HeroQuest ideal system.

And I really, really don't care to follow months/years of bickering predicated on the idea that people like you and me were jsut dead wrong and should be ashamed.