I'm resisting the urge to even call this a 4th edition of D&D. Like 3e Cyberpunk was no longer Cyberpunk. Just come out and say it, "D&D is dead, we're doing something different using many of the same ideas & influences". Some would define D&D as containing the presence of the core classes and races they have had since the game began. Dropping bards, I'mo kay with, but the Ranger too? I dunno, I think I have to look at 4e like a whole new game, rather than a continuation of the old. I think its a way to create a new game world and try to drag old players in with a brand name. It worked with 3.0/3.5 because it kept the old material, and updated it nicely. The system, while not without flaw and kinks, caught on like wildfire and suddenly everyone has a d20 system supplement, that you can port in to D&D if you wanted to. Huge marketing coup, I think. So far, from what I overhear, 4e is running a lot of risks. Probably not enough risks to tank the game, but still, whatI hear sounds like a group of gamers taking the best and leaving the rest in the name of an upgrade. I think they should have tried it with a new campaign setting or seperate release *first*, gotten people sold on it, then converted things to that system.

Of course, that means supporting the 3.5 setting longer, and they are totally out of ideas on that front. The last few supplements have been pretty void of interesting content, IMO. I picked up Dragon Magic, but still can't justify the cost of MM4 or 5, so I guess now is better, but still it doesn't yet seem like a smart process.