Community

As most of us know, and emphasised with the advent of using D&D Next to run Encounters, 4E as we know it will probably be over pretty soon. About the same time, or maybe some time after that, the 4E Online Tools like Compendium and Character Builder will likely be taken offline. (Moderators, Admins, if you have any news about WotC's concrete plans for this, feel free to post here and let the playerbase know)

Assuming that you like 4E and you would like to continue Running / Playing it, which of the following are you likely to do in Response?
1) Download the Well-Supported 3rd Party Character Builders and carry on as if Nothing Happened.
2) Stick to Books that you Have, and if any Updates are missed, so be it.
3) Save Information off Compendium, especially certainly Strong Feats, Items, PPs, EDs, etc.
4) Mix of Above 2 and 3, for all the Classes
5) Mix of Above 2 and 3, but limited to a few Classes / Sources that you like
6) Same as 4, but do a combined effort with all your Usual Group to see who really wants to carry on.
7) Stick to Books you Have, and Houserule everything else for convenience
8) Similar to what happened to 3.5E Player-base, try to find a "Replacement" 4E*. Ideally a Replacement that is very close to the original 4E, with shortcomings and all, and the full Class Selection.
9) Similar to the improvements that Pathfinder made over 3.5E, seek a Replacement that addresses the shortcomings of 4E*. This would be good even if the Class Selection is smaller and do not exactly mirror 4E.
10) You are too busy to consider Any of the Above, so abandon 4E and turn to other Pursuits, Games etc.

* - I'm not sure but I think that a fair bit of 3.5E became Open Source. However, we do not know whether this will happen with 4E.

So, which are you likely to go with? You may opt for more than 1 choice, BTW, just wondering what are the inclinations of 4E Fans as a whole.

PS : If you don't like 4E and don't want to continue playing it, feel free to ignore this Thread ^^;;

I think the biggest issue is the plethora of sub-par feats and powers in the game. This is a matter of simple bloat more than anything else, and some judicious trimming would solve it easily. 

The next biggest would be the lack of a few "iconic" builds, followed closely by the holes in some sub-classes build format. Namely, there are no viable archer-type fighters, transmuter mages, or Fall and Winter Sentinels. I know that the "archer" archetype is best served in 4E by the ranger, but it would be interesting to see how a defender minoring in striker could use ranged attacks to serve their role's funciton. Closely related to that, there are some classes that need "shoring up" with some new content or revised mechanics. The Seeker and the Runepriest come immediately to mind. 

The final big issue (according to many) is the base math on the PCs' end. Specifically, there is the idea that the expertise and defense-boost feats are "feat taxes" to correct an imbalance in attack and defense progression. Adding a +1 per tier to PCs' attacks and defenses automatically would serve to correct this. Now I personally have never had a problem with PCs' accuracy or defenses during gameplay as either a DM or player, so YMMV. To me, it's not really a huge issue, and the post-Essentials expertise and superior defense feats are pure gold. 

The other big complaints I hear on a regular basis are twofold. First, many state that skill challenges turn the "interaction and exploration" portion of the game into another form of combat, limit roleplaying, etc. I find that's an issue that can be fixed on the DM's side of the screen - most of the time my players don't realize they are in a skill challenge situation until it is nearly done. The other is that rituals are a great idea that just doesn't work. I find that is best fixed on the players' side of the screen. As long as the players remember to use these resources, they can be a great help. I think that if the DM gives out a few "free" rituals (i.e. handwaves the component cost a few times) the players will get more mileage out of them. 

Personally, I think that some attacks (petrification, death gazes, certain poison attacks) should be much more dangerous than they are currently but not to the point of 3E and before's "instant win" buttons. I find the best way to handle that is to reduce the number of failed saves needed to trigger the end effect (petrification, death, etc) while making the saves to shrug the effect off a continuum rather than an instant out. In other words, say a medusa hits you with her gaze. You are immobilized and take ongoing damage. Fail the first save and you are petrified, save ends. Fail that save twice more, and it's permanent. Save and you are immobilized and taking ongoing damage again, with the possibility of being petrified. Or, if you save the first time, you are slowed and taking less ongoing damage, save ends. Fail and you are back to immobilized. 

Anyway, that's about how I see it. To me, 4E is still a great system that corrected tons of issues I had with the last edition, and made me want to play D&D again.