Thus far we don't have many folks outside our circle of friends using the forum, and to make it worse most of us are staunch 3ed (and before) types. I don't even consider the version launched until a druid is playable, and every time I crack open the PHB4.0 I see something else that strikes me as highly video-gamey- and I consider myself pretty open minded.

I just wish they hadn't called it 4ed. It sure looks like a good game, but calling it D&D is just out of line.

Anyway, until we get a group that is actually playing 4ed, this forum is going to be pretty lame. Zem, you've been emphasizing that groups can get their own subforum that's not publicly viewable if they want right?

I did mention that. Someone missed the point because I used more than 15 words in my post. They directed me to where I could set up a thread for a campaign. Someone else said it was a good idea and they'd have to remember it. That was pretty much the extent of it.

I agree, if a Fireball doesn't do 1d6/level, it's not D&D.

Just tonight I hosted my first 4e campaign. Normally I create my own campaigns from scratch. However, in part because I am skeptical of whether 4e is really "D&D" I ran this from the Wizards supplied module "Keep on the Shadowfell".

I had played in one of the open betas that Wizards sponsored before 4e came out, so now I've both played and run the new system.

My immediate reaction is that it still "feels" like D&D, it just feels like a 4e character at level 1 is roughly comparable to a 3.5e character at level 8 or so. I couldn't really decide if this was a good or a bad thing, but for novice players, it's probably a good thing.

As far as the complexity of the game rules, the need to consult books and resolve questions about rules, I was expecting that to be much less than in 3.5e, but in reality it felt about the same. We were constantly pulling out the Players Handbook to resolve basic questions about the rules in everything from how to determine bonuses to attacks and damage, to how to shift and take opportunity attacks to how to determine if you had cover or not.

I think the new version will play just fine. I still prefer the 3.5e rules, but that may be because I'm a closet power gamer, I dunno. But for now I'm willing to continue on, it was fun, the first encounter was just challenging enough to provide a few moments of concern for the players and the tactical elements were, frankly, improved from 3.5e.

I'll probably continue with 3.5e for a while, primarily because my druid is just now coming into her full powers, and my gnome/pixie spellthief is also just starting to be a force in the game. Both of those characters are great fun to play, and so far I don't see anything in 4e to compare to either of them. But as I said, 4e still feels like D&D. Which is saying something anyway.

I haven't played 4e with anyone but I enjoy reading the books. I recently got Neverwinter Campaign setting, and loved that such a familiar site has been laid to waste.

It could be enjoyable for beginners, but the true heart of D&D expierence will be customization of 3.0 series.

All the readily accepted uncommon races makes it feel too videogamey and not realaistic to role playing team dynamics.

Having read a bit more, I don't see anything that recommends 4ed to me. I'm rather interested in Pathfinder, and I'll see what WotC does with their next iteration, but for now I have no interested in running under 4ed, though I would be willing to play if someone had the passion for such a game.