Why I think you should try 4e (renamed)

[Rechan]

For me, unless the battle is truly epic (end bosses, etc) 10 rounds or longer is too long.

In all honesty I can count the number of times on my hand that a fight lasted that long. The reasons for that were either:
1) big boss fight,
2) a lot of space (like 200 by 300) area we were all moving through, trying to complete a certain goal while dealing with a ton of enemies,
3) dice being so utterly bad everyone was whiffing.

 

[Imaro]

It is.

But does a more complex rule set necessarily lead to a more complex campaign? What, if any, is the relationship between the two?

Ok, where did I comment on the simplicity or complexity of anyone's campaign as influenced by 3.x or 4e. Now if you're trying to start a new discussion cool, but it feels like you're insinuating I made a value comparison on the quality of peoples games based on the ruleset they choose when I've done no such thing.

 

[Imaro]

That was what I read when I read what you said. Sorry to misunderstand.


I was taking it as a whole, in comparing the systems. Because you did say "within their gaming system", not "within making NPCs".

Well in al honesty I do believe overall 3.x is a more complex system, especially with all sourcebooks, than 4e. But at the same time I think 4e is a more complex system than C&C which in turn is more complex than OD&D or Risus. There are levels to complexity and I do feel 4e's level of complexity is lower than 3.5's.

Now... just so were clear this in no way reflects on the quality of one's game or even my preferences as they can be mercurial (heck I run C&C just like I'll run Exalted or 3.5) but I do think there are levels to complexity.

 

[Rechan]

Well in al honesty I do believe overall 3.x is a more complex system, especially with all sourcebooks, than 4e. But at the same time I think 4e is a more complex system than C&C which in turn is more complex than OD&D or Risus. There are levels to complexity and I do feel 4e's level of complexity is lower than 3.5's.

I think 4e's complexity comes with synergies between characters/within groups. Also, on the actual battlefield. I mean, people call it a wargame/boardgame; that's fairly complex imho.

Also, creating a 17th level character from scratch? Complex.

Now... just so were clear this in no way reflects on the quality of one's game or even my preferences as they can be mercurial (heck I run C&C just like I'll run Exalted or 3.5) but I do think there are levels to complexity.

Aye.

For the record, I think Mallus is just raising the line of question, not accusing. He made the same point earlier, and I think he's just segueing into his point.

 

[Droogie128]

Oh look.. another edition war. This is new and exciting! I'm sure you'll convince the people who've enjoyed whatever edition they've been playing and love to suddenly stop and "convert". Seriously... this is beyond old. I play in a 4e and a 3.5 game and enjoy them both. Why is that so difficult to comprehend?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Fair Enough.

Just don't be surprised that some of us still see "THIS is D&D" when we play 4e.

Don't worry about that!

After playing in over 100 different systems, I long ago came to realize:

1) Edition changes are inevitable, and you can't sell Edition N+1 if its identical to Edition N.

2) Some people have fewer "sacred cows" than others when it comes to what is essential to calling Game X Game X.

3) Nobody agrees as to which "sacred cows" are truly sacred.

What hacks me is when people can't or are unwilling to admit those points, and start with the name-calling & condescension.

4Ed and whatever games may be derived from it- including possible future versions of D&D- may be fun to play, but are not and will never be D&D for me. That doesn't mean that my preferences are superior or predominant, just different...and vice versa.

 

[Mallus]

Now if you're trying to start a new discussion cool...

Yep.

... but it feels like you're insinuating I made a value comparison on the quality of peoples games based on the ruleset they choose when I've done no such thing.

Oops. Sorry. That wasn't my intent.

 

[cangrejoide]

It's not the same thing, because once you create the "Dread Pirate" prestige class... a PC can now, by meeting the requirements of said PrC, attain the same bonus.

The only difference is that if a Dread Pirate prestige class was created, it would *possibly* have an impact outside of that lone encounter. Was the pirate the only such example of the prestige class? Perhaps there is an entire organization of them. And what if one the PC's wants to become one?

If you just hand-wave it aside, and the PC's have questions, or they desire to somehow gain said benefit (be it prestige class or something else) what will you say? Besides "no, I say you can't. The end." .

So you really pretend for your GM to make up a Bare Chested Prestige class just to justify him as a threat?

really? A whole Prestige class just for one encounter?

really?

"Because I said so" is nothing more than a smoke screen for the DM to *possibly be a tyrant. "Because I said so" implies that at any point in the game, the DM can do whatever he wants to your character.

Okay now I get it. You have trust issues with your GM. You requiere him to prove mathematically everything that happens lest he "cheat" on you.

Well sadly I have bad news for you, in 4E the monsters rules are different than the Players rules. The reason behind this is to ease the work of the DM. No other reason.

Again, if you want an exact/mathematically/rule obsessed game system maybe 3E is more what you are looking for. 4E is an entirely new and different game.

 

[Oni]

Oh look.. another edition war. This is new and exciting! I'm sure you'll convince the people who've enjoyed whatever edition they've been playing and love to suddenly stop and "convert". Seriously... this is beyond old. I play in a 4e and a 3.5 game and enjoy them both. Why is that so difficult to comprehend?

I was under the impression this was a discussion and not a particularly vitriolic one. If you're not interested in the discussion I have to ask why you're even posting. Yes blindly bashing games sucks, but screaming edition war the second anyone dares discuss the various approaches of different editions is kind of getting tired.

 

[Fifth Element]

I was under the impression this was a discussion and not a particularly vitriolic one. If you're not interested in the discussion I have to ask why you're even posting. Yes blindly bashing games sucks, but screaming edition war the second anyone dares discuss the various approaches of different editions is kind of getting tired.

I agree. If this is an edition war, what would we call last summer? An edition apocalypse?