What they probably should have done, to reduce it to 5, is to scrap the concept of chaotic and lawful... just gone with something silly like:
- Saintly
- Quite Good
- Neutral
- Quite Bad
- Evil

Arabin

D&D 4th Ed. appears to be the RPG for the miniatures game. Since I have some of those new miniatures, it seems blatently clear that the rules\miniatures are almost interchangeable.

I think its obvious that the miniature dependance of 4th Ed will be a huge issue for many. I would like to point out that I know of very few if any D&D players who are not using miniatures and maps. (Even the old AD&D 1st ED players are using a vinyl cloth and a pen.) Lastly, while the rules talk in squares, its just a valid to talk in distance. You can convert squares to distance if you feel so inclined.

You knew there was about to be a fight when the DM drew a map and said, "Where exactly is your character."

I would also like to point out that almost all battles I have ever had in the older rules were the 'slog up the middle, wizards\clerics backing the fighters, and the thief sniping what he could'.

It should also be noted that this is a completely new game and utterly unrelated to what we used to call Dungeons and Dragons. It should be viewed and judged as such. Therefore as a new game the doors are truely open for players to switch to new rule sets.

So, all that aside...

Mcclaud didn't mention that the EXP calculating is much simpler. (Dear lord I got to know my calculator's name in the old days.) That is less work for the DM. I think you can easily track many of the nuisance calculations if you put your mind to it. Lordy.. we tracked how much damage we did to each individual monster, and when in order to determine exactly how much EXP we got.

I think the game is more geared like a video game, "Blue Elf is about to die!" GOBBLE FOOD "Blue Elf feels better."

I feel that slicking up the combat and simplifying the Spells and character requirements, will really dumb down the game. One of my favorite characters was a Gnome illusionist. He adventured to pay for spell research. The 'party' built a keep to live in, and my gnome had one room set up with intricate scaffolds to run and check things. He invented a spell like Mount, only he floated on a pillow to get from place to place. All these 'wherefores and whys' are gone in 4th Ed.

How did the CEO of Jack In The Box put it, "You can express your individuality by your choice of condiment on your hamburger."

I talked to one player who'd actually played the new adventure module, and he loved it. He says that its the most fun he's ever had as a first level character. (Side note: all this really suggests is that the new first level is significantly more advanced than the old one, and nothing more.) I have no way of judging how long his "New Game High" will last for.

Now, one thing that is supposed to be good about 4th ed is that its easier to balance up the good guys (party) and the bad guys (monsters). I found that was always a difficult problem in the past. Particularly with poor DMs.

Oh, and I've never had a character make it past 10th level. I never slogged one character that long, and I'm sure that if I did, "The Tomb Of Horrors" was waiting for me.

I don't feel that the lack of rules regarding social interactions to be a real concern. I would like to point out that many junior players get started by 'just fighting', and 'I take their gold'.

The old alignment system was just too good, so THAT had to go. It really helped flesh the game out in my opinion. I got a lot of experience points the day my Neutral Evil thief ran a goblin through the back in front of the goody players, and only because the goblin lied.

Where exactly is "Chaotic Greedy" on the new alignment scale anyways.

Lastly, I feel that there may be merits to this new game system, and I think that you would be unwise to bet against WOTC's ability to ram this down your throat. My biggest and only concern is how much the new dumbed down system will deminish the replayability of the game.

World Works Games should really be in bed with WOTC on this. You make one inch terrain sets, and 4th ED is miniature based. At the very least some consulting work should be on the table here. Your take on adventure modules appears to be in line with the new D&D.

All this talk has got me to hold of on purchasing, but I will say this; the 4th edition made D&D Minis better!

I think the biggest issue here is that 4e and the new minis are incompatible with the old stuff.

Nothing ticks me off more than being told to toss all my old stuff, and buy all new stuff.

New D&D is a new game, so it has no draw as a game. The thing that will really kill it, is if third party developers don't get on board. Many are also on the fence, probably because its a completely new game. (I want a Warmachine D20 campaign set... but all that is now on hold.)

I'm sure the third party vendors are not too happy either.

It'll be interesting to see how Mongoose Publishing handles all this. They were founded on releasing d20 products, then moved to miniatures. With the miniatures now cancelled, and d20 down toilet... I wonder what tricks they have up their collective sleeves to stay afloat.

Hopefully they will they do something else with the 2000AD license soon...

Arabin

I'm sure it will work well with the younger generation. It does fit the niche of popular fantasy and game systems.

Releasing the PHB without the bard is dee-you-em DUMB. It's pretty obvious that they wanted to rush all three core books to stores in advance of the con season. Turns out that there will be other PHBs, which will no doubt correct these omissions. The online D&D Insider stuff--which could be the greatest feature of 4E--isn't ready yet, either.

I mostly sat out third edition, but a friend of mine spoke glowingly of his experience with the new system, so I picked up the PHB out of curiosity, thinking I'd try to model an old character, a Viking skald out of the green sourcebook, which I'd actually played using Skills & Powers. It was a let-down to see that I couldn't even start.

Then I read up on the Warlord. I'm excited now, and have even begun planning how my wife and I could team up as the two kinds of Warlord. She would be the tactical leader, a former general who told the truth too much. I would be the inspirational leader, a Henry V knock-off, a fourth-in-line for the throne prince. The sorts of things we would do with these characters, I think, are not the sort of thing you get in just any game. We like an over-the-top GM who encourages us to be larger than life. 4E, as far as I can tell, builds that into the rules. It won't be to all tastes, of course, but I can see us having fun with this new game.

Every class is built with analogous features, and in my uneducated opinion the system does feel a little like a MMORPG, a cool one with a live GM. I think that WotC will really have something special--once they finish the game.