Community

Polaris wrote:

Which is exactly my point. When you say that 3E is an inferior system (a point I do not agree with even with regard to the aforementioned games...especially ADnD 2E), it's implied on these forums that you mean in comparison with 4E. Any other comparison is off-topic of the entire forums, and my point stands. You have no basis to make that comparison.

I can say I'm frustrated with 3E to the point I don't want to play it anymore. I can say that my frustration with 3E began before 4E was announced and likely would have gone past the point of no return without the launch of 4E. I can say that at this point in time, in a world without 4E, I would much rather play Vampire or 2E.

There is more to the world than 3E and 4E, and other games do have a place in this discussion. Calling my opinion off-topic, and saying that because my point is off-topic it does not challenge yours is arrogant.

Polaris wrote:

I never claimed to be unbiased. What I am saying is that I am willing to give the system a fair chance to prove my bias wrong and that I am aware of my own bias. You, sir, don't seem to fit either of those categories. For example I have yet to see you admit that Wotc might have made a wrong decision about anything regarding 4E. Perhaps you might want to reconsider that.

-Polaris

I've been playing 3E for years. Its had its chance. I also have been running 4E demos and a session of Keep on the Shadowfell. Best time I've had running a game since the last time I ran Vampire. I thought I claimed to be aware of my own bias in my previous post.

Disputing your biased assumptions does not tell the whole story about my opinions of WotC being right/wrong about 4E.

Polaris wrote:

Result: Soon (definately within a couple of months let alone a year), all characters of a given type will look and play pretty much the same....which kills 'replayability'.

A couple of problems with your replayability postulate here;

First, roleplaying games aren't necessarily dependent upon mechanical diversity to drive replay value. 3E certainly embraced that paradigm with both arms, but earlier versions of D&D had next-to-zero mechanical differentiation between members of the same race/class combination and there are still folks playing them to this very day. If the underlying system is strong enough, or if the player population decides that variation just isn't a priority, then it doesn't have the same effect on a game like D&D that it would on a computer game or an mmorpg where the storyline is likewise static.

Second, the goal of the 4E mechanics was to allow every available character build to stand on relatively equal footing with every other potential set of choices. With that in mind, each option that is entered into that paradigm increases the number of potential mechanical character types exponentially. Unlike the 3E mindset of; "ok, so that's Divine metamagic, how can we plug that into my warrior Cleric build?", with the 4E paradigm (if it works, I'm willing to concede that it has the possibility of not) those new abilities become options for at least every member of the class it was meant for, and likely even more through multiclass feats and such. With less focus being on cohesive "builds" and over-specialization, more options are going to be considered by the population at large. That leads to a lot more variation in character types over the long haul, especially if they are putting out new support in the form of powersource books every couple of months.

Third, the number of variables available in 4E is not going to remain stagnant. It's not just going to be these three books forever. As new material is published, people will try out the new material, and even if we assume that there are options that are far and away better than others it will still take a decent amount of time for those to be tested and become abusive over the course of actual campaigns. By the time this kind of stuff becomes an issue, there will be new things out to play with. Their publishing schedule means that while there may be a fairly anemic number of options available at the beginning (though this is debatable when compared to earlier editions), that number will expand fairly rapidly and likely keep up with demand by consumers.

This is all without even considering the fact that a 1st level Fighter (or any non-spellcaster, really) in 4E has more options than he did in 3E. When you take that into account, any handwringing over "replayability" seems pretty silly.