*Walks in with a few gallons of gasoline for this here bonfire.*
So, have any of you 4e haters actually PLAYED any 4th? I started in the days of 3.5e, then moved to pathfinder, and was just as adamant against 4 when I heard about it as you guys are now. Then I actually played the damn game, and hey, I prefer it now. It's a hell of a lot more fun to play than 3.5 or pathfinder ever were. I've yet to meet a 4e detractor who has actually played 4e extensively. It's a good game, though it has major issues in the encounter building department. Fun as a player, nightmare for a GM.
As far as 5e goes, as long as they streamline encounter building, I'll try it out at least.
Do you count having two or three campaigns that lasted two or three months each (playing once or twice a week)? I gave it a shot, and found it lacking in every way. The classes are basically all one class with slightly different appearances for the "powers". It exacerbates the main problem D&D has in that the only way to advance your character at a decent rate is to slaughter everything you meet. Almost all non-combat skills were removed from the game and those few that remain had their usage changed to be more combative.
Really? You like 3.5 and think 4e has classes that are too similar to eachother? Every class in 4e, even the ones in the same role, play very different. Unlike 3.5, where your BAB basically determined everything. There is so little difference between a wizard or a sorcerer, a fighter or a knight, a rogue or a scout. The only places you really get diversity is when you start multi-classing and taking prestige classes out the ass. And yeah, 4e can't really do that, but it doesn't need to in order to have an interesting character.
As far as advancement goes, that's entirely up to DM fiat. If they want you to kill all the local wildlife to level up, that's what you're gonna do. If they give you XP for plot development and skill challenges, then that works too. You can't really fault the system for the type of game your DM decides to run.
I will agree that the removal of basically all non-combat mechanics was fucking weird at first, but that's what good old fashioned imagination is for. Do you really need 5 ranks in Profession (barber) to say your character likes to cut hair when he's not out adventuring? No, not at all.
I played 4th Ed. I couldn't get past the fact that I was somehow playing Magic with Minis.
I fail to see the resemblance. Or do you mean that fortune card shit they added with essentials? Cause yeah, my group avoided that crap like the plague.