This is an interesting article and got me thinking… “what if?” What if WotC did in fact rebrand D&D 4e as “D&D Tactics” (I’m sure some marketing genius could come up with something better) and let it run in parallel with D&D 3.5e? I’m willing to bet that some 3.5 folks would be willing to dip their toes into the proverbial 4e waters and form a totally different opinion. I totally get why there might be some angst and in some cases, outright anger toward a very different product that replaced something they loved playing and invested in for years. The 3.5 enthusiasts didn’t want their beloved game replaced, so there was some organically built-in animosity thrown into the mix—such is human nature. I personally feel it was a marketing blunder more than a system blunder.
I liked that 4e bridged the gap between casters and martials. I recall the controversy in 3.5 where some small vocal group of players complained when “Book of 9 swords” gave fighters some versatility.
I loved 4e and think it was a great version of D&D. A lot of 5e is just 4e with different text layout and a lot of 4e was explicit descriptions of things that have been a part of D&D since day one.
I tell people that 4e shouldn't have been called Dungeons and Dragons because it was so different, and it is true, it was different. But, at the same time you could totally argue that 3rd edition could have been said it wasn't dungeons and dragons because it was so fundamental different from Advanced Dungeons and Dragons. The only reason I acknowledge the "its not d&d" argument is I truly feel if it wasn't a version of D&D the system would still be around and and thriving, especially in the wake of how crappy 5e is. I believe people would have been jumping ship to the game that 4e would have been if it was another game that existed in parallel to D&D as opposed to a previous version. I love 4e, I mean if 4e was a chick id put a ring on its finger and have it bare my children, its my favorite fantasy system bar none. I don't understand the hate other then people just didn't like something different. I haven't found a single person who has bad mouthed 4e, called it a video game instead of a role playing game, or any of the other insults, who ever even played it, they just repeat the insults they heard from others without even giving it a chance, How can a heavily tactical turned based experience be like an MMO. 4e was like the Amiga of rpgs, it was far ahead of its time, and Wotc just didn't know what to do with it, didn't know how to market it. got greedy with its product licensing, and it cost us the best version of D&D the ever made.
Haha! That’s too funny. For me, AD&D would’ve been my elementary school crush and AD&D 2e would’ve been my high school sweetheart. 4e is pretty darn sexy though. Never got to play 3/3.5e (life and career choices, moves, etc.). I dipped my toe back in with 4e for a short stint, and later on DMed for my kids with 5e. We revisited 4e and loved it. 4e is what we play now, and it’s awesome. I wish I had bought the books when they came out instead of having to pay a premium for out-of-print books now. But, at least they’re still available.
5E was my first foray into DnD and as I’ve often said, it will always have a special place in my heart. It’s the version that my family still wants to play so that’s what we play. I still like it and like playing it. 😊😊
This is an interesting article and got me thinking… “what if?” What if WotC did in fact rebrand D&D 4e as “D&D Tactics” (I’m sure some marketing genius could come up with something better) and let it run in parallel with D&D 3.5e? I’m willing to bet that some 3.5 folks would be willing to dip their toes into the proverbial 4e waters and form a totally different opinion. I totally get why there might be some angst and in some cases, outright anger toward a very different product that replaced something they loved playing and invested in for years. The 3.5 enthusiasts didn’t want their beloved game replaced, so there was some organically built-in animosity thrown into the mix—such is human nature. I personally feel it was a marketing blunder more than a system blunder.
I liked that 4e bridged the gap between casters and martials. I recall the controversy in 3.5 where some small vocal group of players complained when “Book of 9 swords” gave fighters some versatility.
I loved 4e and think it was a great version of D&D. A lot of 5e is just 4e with different text layout and a lot of 4e was explicit descriptions of things that have been a part of D&D since day one.
https://www.geekeratimedia.com/p/zones-of-control-a-history-of-miniatures
I tell people that 4e shouldn't have been called Dungeons and Dragons because it was so different, and it is true, it was different. But, at the same time you could totally argue that 3rd edition could have been said it wasn't dungeons and dragons because it was so fundamental different from Advanced Dungeons and Dragons. The only reason I acknowledge the "its not d&d" argument is I truly feel if it wasn't a version of D&D the system would still be around and and thriving, especially in the wake of how crappy 5e is. I believe people would have been jumping ship to the game that 4e would have been if it was another game that existed in parallel to D&D as opposed to a previous version. I love 4e, I mean if 4e was a chick id put a ring on its finger and have it bare my children, its my favorite fantasy system bar none. I don't understand the hate other then people just didn't like something different. I haven't found a single person who has bad mouthed 4e, called it a video game instead of a role playing game, or any of the other insults, who ever even played it, they just repeat the insults they heard from others without even giving it a chance, How can a heavily tactical turned based experience be like an MMO. 4e was like the Amiga of rpgs, it was far ahead of its time, and Wotc just didn't know what to do with it, didn't know how to market it. got greedy with its product licensing, and it cost us the best version of D&D the ever made.
Haha! That’s too funny. For me, AD&D would’ve been my elementary school crush and AD&D 2e would’ve been my high school sweetheart. 4e is pretty darn sexy though. Never got to play 3/3.5e (life and career choices, moves, etc.). I dipped my toe back in with 4e for a short stint, and later on DMed for my kids with 5e. We revisited 4e and loved it. 4e is what we play now, and it’s awesome. I wish I had bought the books when they came out instead of having to pay a premium for out-of-print books now. But, at least they’re still available.
5E was my first foray into DnD and as I’ve often said, it will always have a special place in my heart. It’s the version that my family still wants to play so that’s what we play. I still like it and like playing it. 😊😊
I’m a big fan of 4e! It was designed to purpose, very difficult to break, easy to learn. It was a mini combat game, but so was 3.5 at the time