CB's biggest failing by far: No custom content possible

[lonewolfdevel]

3.x/PF is significantly easier to model than 4e. SW SAGA edition is easier to model than 4e (another pet project of mine). Gurps is easier to model than 4e. 4e is a down right PITA to model, specifically bc it's exception based. There are a bunch of corner cases that are simple to express on paper as a rule or in your head when your playing, but are actually very complex when you have to break it down for computers.

I'm sorry but I have to disagree with the above assertion. Having been there and done that (I'm one of the developers for Hero Lab), my personal experience is vastly different from the above claims. Supporting 4E is a veritable walk in the park compared to 3.5/PF and Gurps. In fact, based on my personal experience with supporting these systems, on a difficulty scale with a 0 being easy and a 10 being extremely difficult, I would rank them as follows:

4E - 1.5
3.5 - 9.0
Pathfinder - 7.5
Gurps - 4.5

The 4E system is comparatively quite simple in its structure. All of the supplements fit within the established framework pretty smoothly, and the number of exceptions is quite low. In the case of 3.5, it is all exceptions. And exceptions to the exceptions. And completely new rules mechanics introduced in every supplement, many of which are at odds with other rules. Yes, 3.5 is almost an order of magnitude more complex than 4E to fully and properly implement.

If your assertion hinges solely on the core rulebooks, then 3.5 is not as large a leap from 4E. But if you take the game as a whole, incorporating all of the official supplements (I'm excluding 3PP material here), then the complexity ratings above are a reasonably accurate reflection of the game systems you cited.

This assessment is based on having to actually implement/codify each of these game systems and understand all of their inherent complexities. Hopefully, this information proves useful....

P.S. Hero Lab supports three of the game systems referenced. We originally planned to launch Hero Lab with support for Gurps, but the license never got finalized. So we did extensive work on Gurps, even though it was never released, which explains my high level of confidence in rating Gurps' relative complexity above.

 

[jimmifett]

I'm sorry but I have to disagree with the above assertion. Having been there and done that (I'm one of the developers for Hero Lab), my personal experience is vastly different from the above claims. Supporting 4E is a veritable walk in the park compared to 3.5/PF and Gurps. In fact, based on my personal experience with supporting these systems, on a difficulty scale with a 0 being easy and a 10 being extremely difficult, I would rank them as follows:

4E - 1.5
3.5 - 9.0
Pathfinder - 7.5
Gurps - 4.5

The 4E system is comparatively quite simple in its structure. All of the supplements fit within the established framework pretty smoothly, and the number of exceptions is quite low. In the case of 3.5, it is all exceptions. And exceptions to the exceptions. And completely new rules mechanics introduced in every supplement, many of which are at odds with other rules. Yes, 3.5 is almost an order of magnitude more complex than 4E to fully and properly implement.

If your assertion hinges solely on the core rulebooks, then 3.5 is not as large a leap from 4E. But if you take the game as a whole, incorporating all of the official supplements (I'm excluding 3PP material here), then the complexity ratings above are a reasonably accurate reflection of the game systems you cited.

This assessment is based on having to actually implement/codify each of these game systems and understand all of their inherent complexities. Hopefully, this information proves useful....

P.S. Hero Lab supports three of the game systems referenced. We originally planned to launch Hero Lab with support for Gurps, but the license never got finalized. So we did extensive work on Gurps, even though it was never released, which explains my high level of confidence in rating Gurps' relative complexity above.

I'll grant you that yes, 3.x/pf did/does frequently change and introduce entirely new mechanics often, and my original work was with the 3.5 core back then.

However, 4e also releases new rules mechanics, and has changed the format of it's powers frequently since release. Granted, once I got my model of powers to it's current form, it's been an order of magnitude easier to enter in data, but i still quite frequently find (what are now minor bumps) that force me to adjust my model. Lookign through core PF and APG (all i own) I don't see much in what I would call difficult to model. That could just be personal perspective in part because i'm used to it now and it "just pops in there" like a staypuft marshmallow man.