New player asking for some advice/help, please. 3e vs 4e. Which one is for me?

[ZombieMaster]

If the original poster hasn't run screaming off into the night,

Oh, I'm still here. I've found all the advice to be quite interesting. Big thanks to everyone.

I want to try both at some point, thats for sure. Also I plan to compare them to the alternative options listed here as soon as I get a chance.

I'm on my second read through of 3.5 PHB, making sure I understand everything 100%. I will say it hasn't seen overly complicated so far. Dense perhaps, a surely their are many options. But I honestly find all the information interesting; not something thats taken anything away from it. I've skimmed through the 4.0 book as well, and plan on reading it more in depth hopefully soon down the line.

As for the people who mentioned knowing people to play: I know a guy through MtG that DMs some 3.5, but that's not as much as an issue cause I already have a couple good friends who want to play regardless of the edition and I'm looking to game with them for the moment (that and I'm the kind of guy that thinks, even without prior experiance, that I'd make a great DM. Here's to hoping I eventually prove myself right.)

What I do before running a new system is a trial for about 3 hours with just myself. I roll up a character or party, and take these characters through some encounters so I can spot potential problems and learn the system from preparation to combat. Basic rules are great for this (like when a system has the watered down rules included).

Yeah, regardless of the edition I run I'm gonna try to make a tutorial campaign that's only real objective is to get them from place and learn the mechanics (and also press myself on my DMing). I'm certainly not opposed to preperation time.

Also, I hate to say it, because I know the advice is well intended (and I thank you for it), but when someone tells me I might want to start with something simpler, I tend to one try the more complex one anyway. Brash and over confident: likely. But hard to change (it did get me through college).

A final reason for my 3.5 lean might sound strange or be way off base (and might be very wrong, and someone will probably tell me I am). But I've played a lot of video games, and when I looked through the 4e PHB it had a certain video game feel for it (and looked like a lot of fun). But I was looking to play something completely different, and in 3.5 and it's encyclopedia of 'simulation like' rules and plethora of choices (if you can get the books), it looks closer to being the game I'm in the mood to play. Although 4.0 surely seems like an ever deepening change of pace somewhere down the line (as the options within it will probably grow even more over time).

And again, so far you guys have been above and beyond helpful. Thanks a lot.

 

[wedgeski]

And again, so far you guys have been above and beyond helpful. Thanks a lot.

Good luck, have fun, and let us know how it goes.

 

[Jack99]

I was making a joke.

See Mallus last post for a good joke. Yours wasn't.

However, a DM that would introduce a Pit Fiend as an encounter and by game time, NOT know how it operated is somewhat less than competent based on my experience. YMMV.

If you run a sandbox game, it happens that players do unexpected stuff, and run into a monster you do not know by heart, nor have had the time to prepare. But of course if you railroad your players through the campaign, I imagine you do not have this problem.

As far as having a player like me, well, if a DM doesn't know what he's doing he may find his NPCs being flattened like Mini that goes up against an M1A1...

Where you the guy claiming to have an 8-year old?

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I'm on my second read through of 3.5 PHB, making sure I understand everything 100%. I will say it hasn't seen overly complicated so far. Dense perhaps, a surely their are many options. But I honestly find all the information interesting; not something thats taken anything away from it. I've skimmed through the 4.0 book as well, and plan on reading it more in depth hopefully soon down the line.

Both games - maybe all RPGs - have a lot of "emergent" complexity that only appears when you actually play the game.

4E has a lot of complexities inherent to maneuvering and positioning on the battlefield and requires managing conditions. How to get everyone (enemies and allies) into a position to use your powers best (for example, catch many enemies with a Scorching Burst without harming allies)
3E complexity often comes from stacking several buffs and figuring out whether all apply to the current situation. For example AC is effectively 4-6 values (but you don't need them all the time) - Your bog-standard AC, flat-footed AC, Touch AC and finally Flat-footed Touch AC. For some characters, incorporeal Touch AC and "flat-footed, incorporeal touch" AC.

Creating a high level character can also take quite some time if you spend some effort on spell selection, feat selection and skill selection.

With hindsight I'd say one can do things too complicated as DM or player.