neobolts
Explorer
You seem to have already solidified strong opinions about various editions, but I'm going to assume your question is serious, rather than an edition wars post.
On Prior Editions
You seem to value systems that are both complex and flexible. You would probably enjoy Pathfinder immensely if you don't already play it. I would agree that 4th edition would be a terrible match for your play style preferences, as it does mimic elements of MMOs and rewards what some would see as cheap tricks under RAW (rules as written) gameplay.
What 3e does and doesn't do well
3e is complex and flexible. 3e does lend itself to recreating iconic characters better, what with its vast library of options and support for epic level play. It also lends itself to matching incredibly specific character concepts to existing rules. The downsize of 3e is the math creep that appears in the edition, an ever-increasing stack of modifiers. Also, the feat trees (feats with layers of prerequisites) while offering options, weren't always well balanced, leading to arguably obvious choices as to which feat to take. Obvious choices (or "non-choices") is a problem in any gaming rules system, but 3e feats tend to struggle with this problem noticeably at times.
How 5e compares to 3e
Conversely, 5e is streamlined and flexible. You lament the loss of options from 3e (presumably feat trees and prestige classes), but with class paths, backgrounds, and optional feats, there is plenty of choice to make a unique character in 5e. But the focus is different...5e lends itself to better creating iconic parties of adventurers rather than iconic heroes in a vacuum. This is because of value caps and bounded accuracy. The difference between a 1st and 20th level character is a lot less in 5e than 3e. While this suggests that a 20th level 5e character is simply less imposing than in 3e, there are some key upsides to caps/bounds:
- You avoid that stack of modifiers that start to slow down gameplay.
- Also, a higher level character fighting an army of orcs is a dull exercise in 3e, but monsters stay relevant longer in 5e.
- Additionally, characters don't get left in the dust in 5e. You won't end up with the best climber being 20 points in modifier above the rest of the party on a climbing check. Both the monster viability and a narrower range of modifiers make it easily for DMs to create combat encounters and set DCs.
I don't think stat blocking the novel iconics was a design priority for 5e. NPCs such as Mordenkaiden and Harshnag have been stat blocked in 5e, and IIRC they simply get unique templates that push them above a PCs power level.
At the end of the day, 3e does best suit your play style, but there are strong upsides to both the 3e and 5e set of rules.
