I am, because as much as I resent some of the changes, I do like some of the stuff they kept and I think it will be a fun game to play, even if it's not traditional D&D... I look at it as sort of related to regular D&D only in the same loose sense that Star Trek: The Next Generation was related to classic Star Trek; they're supposedly related but C'MON, who're you FOOLIN'? The differences are obvious... same deal here, some of the names may be the same but it's a whole new game... If you look at it as a game in its own right rather than a continuation of standard D&D, it doesn't look so bad... and the art RULES! (I have the preview books, and both Orcus and Asmodeus look awesome!) I like the idea of evil and chaotic Paladins (why should only LG get a holy warrior?)
How many of you are gonna buy the new rules (4E)?
Me neither.. it's hard for me to give up a system that I spent a long time learning, and still haven't fully grasped (not to mention a good wad of cash for the sourcebooks/software). Unless nearly everyone else makes the switch quickly so that I'm forced to learn it, I'm sticking with the status quo.
It's a lot of money, even more since the monthly subscription fee seems pretty important to get content. As a DM, I'm comfortable with 3.5's balance, and I can tweak it or make my own stuff to adress the problems WOTC did in 4e.
Still playing 2nd ed in my home game. So, I'm probably not going to, at least for awhile, but its inevitable that I'll see something I like and buy it, then the hook is set ...
I like the "fluff" that 2e produced, but I don't really miss the 2e ruleset. I especially don't miss "your character cannot advance beyond this level if it is non-human."
I'm thinking of buying the 4E Player's Handbook because I'm fairly optimistic about what I've heard of how classes now work, but I'm definitely not interested in paying a monthly fee.
All in all, I think the mechanics sound very improved and balanced in the new edition, so that would be my main appeal.
Yeah, but did anyone actually use that rule? No one I ever met payed attention to it - no one I ever heard of used that rule ...
As with anything, you have to pick and choose ... but, as a whole, I liked 2E better than anything which followed. (mind you we'd house ruled a better skill system well before 3+ came out, which was the only good thing it tried to add to the game)
Still haven't decided yet.
I'm something of RPG colector (for example I buy anything related to planes), and when I buy RPG stuff I look for these things: 1. Setting, 2. Fluff and finnaly 3. Rules and Mechanics.
I have this opinon that good game or campain can be palyed no mater what are rules and mechanics. But to buy 4e just becaouse it has great mechanics is just not good enough reason for me to give large amouts of cash, setting and fluff there are practicaly non-existant and half baked. (To me it is like buying new console without any games).
I'm buying and using the rules, but not the fluff for the most part.
I've seen some major changes in fluff in relation to previous editions (and many of these changes I'm not keen on), but the fluff certainly doesn't look non-existant.
I got 5 words: Wizards Presents: Worlds and Monsters
*yawn*
Call me when WotC is serious about making a new edition of D&D.
-420
1/2 seconding Zim, but 1/2 disagreeing.
Faces of Evil was better because it had Xanxost in it. The Ilithlaid didn't have Xanxost, did it? 
Well I haven't bought a D&D game yet and I'll tell you if I ever do It sure as the nine as the nine hells is lawful is not gonna be 4E.
I'll be sticking with 2nd Ed; I've got a group of good players and several thousand dollars worth of source books so I've really got no compelling reason to go to 3 or 3.5, let alone 4 
Dunamin wrote:
I've seen some major changes in fluff in relation to previous editions (and many of these changes I'm not keen on), but the fluff certainly doesn't look non-existant.
Well for starters: cosmology, that anyone here on Planewalker could have make in 30 minutes, Gnomes that are monsters and cunning manipulators and advisors of Battorian lords - Pit Fiands with only 3 skills. etc, etc...
Ok, I admit there is fluff (and setting) but I don't like it. It is just too simplyfied.
You know old saying:"less is better". That one it just cannot be aplied to PRGs, at leat not in terms of setting and fluff, and definetly not in terms of planes.
Either that or I'we just become too old and too bitter. 
Nah your not to old and bitter Squaff. Times are just changing, badly, nothings good anymore. It isn't just D&D thats suffering. Its everything. Movies, T.V, Games(especially), Music(as always), food, protest movement, fundementalist religeon is on the rise world wide, and I'm finding very little that gives me hope of anything that might be considered a better future. But I feel the Drizzt Do'urden was right when he said we can't dwell in nostalgia saying that time were better back then and all that rubbish. We have to march forever onward and only us horrible can actually do anything to make a better future. Intelligently though, not by another damn charity rock concert or leaping in front of limozines or something like that. We just gotta knuckle down and actually do something.
I'll be buying the core three. They may have trouble selling stuff to me after that, however.
I'm thinking of buying the 4E Player's Handbook because I'm fairly optimistic about what I've heard of how classes now work, but I'm definitely not interested in paying a monthly fee.
All in all, I think the mechanics sound very improved and balanced in the new edition, so that would be my main appeal.
I wouldn't worry about the monthly subscription thing. I believe the idea is that it'll fill the same niche as Dungeon and Dragon did, as well as providing some tools to make 4th ed easier to play online.
They're doubtless going to make it hurt not to have it though, otherwise they wouldn't bother,
Actually the Pit Fiend has more than three skills. Every skill gets a bonus equal 1/2 the character/creature's level. The three skills in the skills entry are trained and get a +5 bonus.
I'm gonna get it. Like Duckluck said in the other 4E bashing thread, 3E has a lot of major problems. If 4E can do what 3E couldn't, rules-wise, I'm all for it. Who cares about the fluff that comes with it? You can use the ruleset without the fluff.
Wrong thread. Somebody hit me.
I'm getting 4e since there's plenty of things I don't like about the rules there were before. The assumed assumptions for a 4e campaign never bothered me, since I never used the standard assumptions in any edition's core D&D.
Eh, I don't know. They probably saw that Paizo had a good thing going and wanted a piece of it for themselves. They probably also think they can boost membership by marketing it in their books, on their webpage, and on their forums. But that doesn't mean it will be essential, there were lots of people who got by just fine without Dungeon or Dragon, or most of the 3.x books, for that matter (I was one of them. I own less than a third of the 3.x books they put out, and I never had a Dungeon or Dragon subscription).
I don't remember where I got this from, but I believe that the subscription content will be composed of Dungeon, Dragon, what used to be the web expansions, the web tools, maybe the art galleries, and perhaps some of the old website collums (those last two are my speculation). I may be making this up, but I also believe the errata will be available in the non-subscription portion of the site. The cost of the subscription is suposed to be less that or equal to the old cost of Dungeon and Dragon, so . . . .
It's a little money-grabby, I guess, but not too bad.
I will not be buying 4E, except for possibly a few books here and there. I do have most of the 3.5 books, all recent Dragons and every Dungeon magazine, and plenty of older material. I use them all as source material, drawing elements that I want into my own adventures. With the wealth of material available (not to mention 2nd party products), I have tons of adventures still to be run.
Since 4E changes the mechanics completely, I have no interest in using the new mechanics. I likewise have utterly no interest in their default setting. I compare this with my migration from 2E to 3.5E, where I liked the mechanics, and the setting was familiar enough to use.
I really don't see any reason why I would need to purchase 4th Edition. Truth be told I'm probably heading towards a chunk of my life where I won't be gaming at all. Oh, I'll probably pick it up again in 5 or 10 years, maybe sooner, but by then Wizards will be well into 6th edition, so I'll reevaluate then. Even if I were still actively gaming, though, I'd probably pass on it. I have all the fluff I'll ever need from a combination of 2nd Edition and my own imagination, and the 3.X rules, while flawed in some ways, are at least adequate for my needs.
I want to see what new monsters will be added to the game (REALLY new monsters, not altered old ones like the Eladrin!) Of course, I AM curious as to what the old monsters will look like in the new edition, especially Orcus! (Orcus had better kick serious *** in the new edition, or I'm going to be VERY upset!)
I've probably mentioned this before in another thread, but I do look forward to seeing if the 4e implementation of psionics is any good. I don't think TSR/WotC have done a very good job of properly integrating psionics so far (3.0 it has a number of problems, 3.5 it's too much like an alternate arcane spell list). Starting out with psionics as part of core material might help.
Yeah, they SHOULD'VE added a Psi class to the core rulebooks, but looks like they didn't... I assume Mind Flayers will be Psionic power users, though... looks like poor, neglected Psis will have to wait for yet another rendition of the Psionic Handbook!
Wow, how unsurprisingly greedy.
Yeah, the trend started when they came out with Player's Handbook 2 and Dm Guide 2 for 3.5E (yes, they've have 5 monster manuals, but that's different... who doesn't need MORE MONSTERS??? Of course, I only have MM 1 and 2 since MM 3 thru 5 are 3.5E and I don't use it...)
I'm not going to buy it until I try it. I haven't seen anything much to make me think it'll be better than 3.5 and quite allot to make me think it'll be worse. Course it's all relative since I haven't really seen that much of it at all.