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

[RefinedBean]

In D&d, if something is supposed to die in one or two hits, that means it has low hit dice.

Well, they do have the lowest hit dice. They have 1d1.

 

[alleynbard]

3rd edition is more simulationist. What that means is that the emphasis is less on balance than on trying to simulate verisimilitude and provide rules for everything.

4th edition is more gamist. It focuses more on balance and abstract rules which may not make as much "sense" but work well from the perspective of a game and keeping things flowing.

I am going to echo this statement and say this is the crux of your choice.

Both games operate under different assumptions. Therefore both can give you what you are looking for in different ways. Though, as has been stated, neither are going to do the werewolf bard very well. You are going to find roadblocks in both cases. But, with a little work, both games will produce such a PC. There is a little more to it than that, but I am not sure how you want the werewolf to use his powers (can he willfully change, does he know, etc.) so that might help swing the choice.

Both games have a strong player base and you are likely to find support no matter what choice you make. There is 3rd party support for both games, 3e has a long history (both good and bad) of that support but 4e is coming into its own, albeit somewhat slowly. You will likely find ample advice for both games here at ENWorld.


So, the choice will definitely come down to play style preference. As stated, 3e tries very hard to emulate reality through its rule adjudication. The rules represent "in-game physics". On the other hand, 4e doesn't always attempt that. Instead, it presents a more cinematic ruleset that almost allows the player to take narrative control on occasion. Especially with those powers that incur forced movement. It is the DM and the player's responsibility to justify that in-game. Meanwhile 3e does a rather good job presenting the basics on how these abilities and spells appear in the created world while still allowing a certain amount of customization.

As others have said, I highly recommend you give both games a test drive. And do the same with Pathfinder when it is released. Working with the system is likely the only way you are going to know for certain which you prefer. I have found systems often play very differently than how they read. So a few practice sessions would not hurt a thing.

Also, don't make a mistake and not include your players in on the choice. Make sure you listen to what they have to say, help them where you can, and insure they understand the choices the group is making. Nothing kills a game faster than a group of players who are unhappy with what the DM is doing. In fact, if they are new to this hobby as well, this is doubly important. First impressions are everything and you need to make sure they have the proper tools to help make formulate an opinion.

Both games fulfill different urges. You see a lot of banter on the subject but neither game is objectively better than the other. Some people just prefer one version over the other. In the end, follow your "fun" and you should be fine.

 

[billd91]

If I were forced to play in a 4e game, I would rather do it without minions and skill challenges than with. Someone here described minions as "strange visitors from another game system" and I am inclined to agree. In D&d, if something is supposed to die in one or two hits, that means it has low hit dice.

Actually, any hit dice with only 1 hp per die works pretty well too. They may not go down in 1 hit, but that's fine with me and yet they still have an offensive punch and don't stand up like something with normal hp.

 

[jbear]

I can only say that if you decide to run with 4e, or you're still tossing the idea around, check out Running Commentary on PirateCat's Campaign and LostSouls Sandboxing in KotS threads.

I think you will find both very insightful and inspiring. I think myself personally I saw many of the limitations I perceived with 4e were limitations I was putting on it myself.

Maybe someone kind and savvy could put some links for the OP to follow and taste a bit of the flavour one can achieve when the game is DM'd the right way.

 

[ZombieMaster]

Well, first off, thanks for all the replies and help everyone. You guys were certainly helpful. Information and advice I asked for, and information and advice I received.

The first conclusion I've made is that more research is ahead of me (but I knew that going in.)

As far as the simulationist vs gamist thing goes, I'd have to say I do feel a little on the simulationist side but I understand I'm gonna have to get a feel for both before I really know (and I might just end up liking both for different reasons).

I do think (from what I understand) I underestimated 4e out of combat ability though. It seems that (more) complicated rules and slightly restrictive but simpler rules both can be used well as long as you can tune them in with your gaming and your imagination.

I will say another reason I have a lean towards 3 at the moment is the tremendous amount of extra material around it I could pull from. 4e must be catching up and will one day surpass it in all likelihood. But that only makes me think I should play with the wealth of 3e that is there now, so when I want to try something different 4e will be even more expansive than it is now. For example one of my players has expressed interest in a monk, which I can do in 3.5 now right off the bat, while in 4e will surely come but I have to wait. Luckily 4e seems like it can only get better with time.

So I guess my feelings in short: I want to play 3 now and 4 eventually. But I'm gonna take your guys advice and try to get to know both before I make a final decision.

As far as the sinking in the deep end, I'm gonna test run things until I feel comfortable enough with the rules before I start anything. I'd like to actually put together some tutorial stuff to bring my players up to speed before going anywhere.

And again: thanks a lot to everyone.

 

[Kask]

check out Running Commentary on PirateCat's Campaign and LostSouls Sandboxing in KotS threads.

I'd hate to sandbox a campaign where the NPCs planet wide, morph every time PCs grow in power.

 

[ZombieMaster]

On some more specific things that were mentioned...

I looked into Pathfinder and will def dl the beta. Although I'm a little weary of using an unfinished system for my first time I'll look into it after I consider myself enough of an expert on the 3.5 system to see if it's for me. Certainly some of the skill and class upgrade seems intriguing.

I will add looking further into the other rpgs mentioned (C&C, Mutants and Masterminds, World of Darkness, ect) on my to do list (which is growing ever longer).

On the werewolf/bard front you guys offered some great advice. And messing with the lycantrophy stuff was the direction I saw myself going in, but the 4e methods do seem interesting. I plan on looking into both. Thanks a lot.

As far necromancy goes (and I must admit to a certain pull from the dark arts) it's mentioned in the 3.5 PHB as well as other source materials, but I didn't see anything in the 4 PHB. Is there somewhere else in 4th I could look into for those kind of abilities, or is it something that will come in time?

Also some people have mentioned poor balance/play in upper levels of 3.5. I don't think any of my players are looking to abuse the game. But is there any suggested house rules or 3.5 edits on curtailing these things I might want to look into?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Piratecat]

I'd hate to sandbox a campaign where the NPCs planet wide, morph every time PCs grow in power.

Err - what does this have to do with the mentioned threads? I don't do that, and I don't think Lostsoul does either.

The mentioned thread is here. It walks through what my players and I have been finding as we switched from 3e to 4e. The beginning may be useful skimming to see if it's useful for you.

Zombiemaster, it seems like you're doing a really good job figuring out what works for you. I wouldn't worry too much about high level 3.5 play. We found that DM prep got fairly heavy, and combat slowed down somewhat, but we still had a great time with it.

 

[ZombieMaster]

I'm assuming western medieval fantasy is your desired genre at the moment, if this isn't the case, you should speak up now. Also, a little background on you and your friends and what led you to the hobby and what you want out of it may help us avoid pitfalls.

I would say a certain kind of tweaked western fantasy. But you know, if someone wants to be a ninja or something I'm not gonna throw Tolkien at them (as enriching as that would be).

As far as background goes, tough to say. We're big time 'gamers', everything from video games to basketball really, as well as being a fantasy buffs in general (Frodo, Cloud, Rand, all that fun stuff). Always wanted to RP though becasue it simply offers things no other game can because you essentialy have more freedom than any other game; but I also wanted to do make sure I did it right, did all the neccessary homework ect. Which I guess is why I'm looking into the different versions (although honestly both seem to have a lot of what I'm looking for).

The question we should all be asking is which edition does Vin Diesel play?

Or maybe we should be asking: in which version can we better RP AS Vin Diesel?!?

Roll a d20:
- if it's odd play 3e,
- if it's even play 4e,
- on a natural 20 play both,
- on a natural 1 play Monopoly with little voices and sound effects.

Haha. Made me laugh out loud with that one.
If I get Monopoly I'll just try to RP it properly. You know design some hobos that can attack you at the trainyard and give everyone a saving throw to have their luggage stolen in the hotel. Give the players the option to sleep on the street as long as they're willing to face hordes of homeless undead.

Now if I only I could properly balance a hat and a thimble at higher levels....
(gonna have to house rules ban the dog: legs make it far too powerful)

 

[Shroomy]

I will say another reason I have a lean towards 3 at the moment is the tremendous amount of extra material around it I could pull from. 4e must be catching up and will one day surpass it in all likelihood. But that only makes me think I should play with the wealth of 3e that is there now, so when I want to try something different 4e will be even more expansive than it is now. For example one of my players has expressed interest in a monk, which I can do in 3.5 now right off the bat, while in 4e will surely come but I have to wait. Luckily 4e seems like it can only get better with time.

If you do go with 4e, I would recommend getting a DDI subscription. One of its many benefits is a playtest version of the PHB3 monk; its being released on May 11th. While its a playtest, it should be very useable; I'm currently playing a playtest version of the artificer without many problems.