Bullgrit, I don't necessarily agree with your blog on this subject point-for-point, but on the whole, I agree with your assessment of the game.
I've experienced D&D4
- Thread starter Bullgrit
- Start date
- Status
You don't play D&D above 7th level in 3E, then?
unan oranis
First Post
Wow, I thought I invented that rule for my own 1e game... turns out it was the real rule all along? Hilarious...
Mark Chance
Boingy! Boingy!
Yes, I do, and I don't particularly like how slow combats run. Switching to game that makes combat even more intricate and slow is hardly a selling point for me. If you like it, fine. Good for you.
And notice how I said that without implying that you have preconceived notions that have prevented you from arriving at an informed opinion?
UngeheuerLich
Legend
Was ADnD 2nd edition D&D for you? i started there and i can feel a step back to 2nd edition in a way. Right now i would be pleased with a mix of 3rd and 4th edition. As i am pleased in a certain degree with both.
I like trailblazers attempt to merge both versions.
ADnD had its merits, as but it needed 5 years of playing 3rd edition to realize it.
3rd edtition had its merits and 4th edition also does.
Its a radical change, a little bit too gamist, a little bit too much focus on a grid. All in all a fun revolution with an aim to balance classes once again. (Like fighters and mages were balanced in ADnD... in a different kind of way, but more or less balanced)
I like trailblazers attempt to merge both versions.
ADnD had its merits, as but it needed 5 years of playing 3rd edition to realize it.
3rd edtition had its merits and 4th edition also does.
Its a radical change, a little bit too gamist, a little bit too much focus on a grid. All in all a fun revolution with an aim to balance classes once again. (Like fighters and mages were balanced in ADnD... in a different kind of way, but more or less balanced)
Rarely find myself agreeing with Bullgrit, but do on this - and I have played 80+ hours of 4E. Not the same game it used to be. Great game, but not the same. I'm sure that pleases some people, which is fine. Fortunately, we have the OGL and the OSR movement keeping the original games alive and well. I would actually enjoy playing the new and old editions because they offer different experiences.
Mark Chance
Boingy! Boingy!
I've played and enjoyed every version of D&D except 4E, which I've not played because (a) my group has zero interest in it and (b) nearly everything I've heard from people whom I trust says I probably wouldn't like it.
I like trailblazers attempt to merge both versions.
Trailblazer rocks. I'm incorporating elements of Trailblazer into Pathfinder-compatible material that I'm working on for when I put on the DM hat full time again.
SteveC
Doing the best imitation of myself
Well then you might consider playing 4E, because those higher level combats are run much faster than in 3X. Having run and played the game into Paragon levels, and played an Epic one, it runs so much faster that there's no comparison. In 3X I ran a Shackled City battle (the Temple of Wee Jas, if you're curious) that lasted four play sessions of 5 hours each. That's 20 hours. And the battle wasn't even particularly interesting. Nothing in 4E can touch that.
So you might not like 4E (and that's you're choice, obviously) but the notion that high level combat runs slower is absolutely counter to everything I've experienced. Heck I haven't heard from anyone who's run an Epic level game who says 3X would have been faster. I freely invite people to come out of the woodwork to tell me that is an incorrect notion.
--Steve
It rarely is. Indeed, there have been many major, major shifts to D&D over the years. Some of them even come in the middle of an edition (and I'm not talking about the release of 3.5e here).
If you play 3E, then go to a group that is playing 3.5e with all classes from Magic of Incarnum and Book of Nine Swords, are you still playing the same game? The way the classes work is so radically different from those in the PHB... but you can have PHB classes alongside those two late 3.5e books and the game will play fine.
D&D really is bigger than you can experience. You can see portions of the game, but when you look at the great sweep of everything, there is just so much there: different ways of approaching problems. Consider the different methods of dealing with non-combat abilities: Thief skills, Secondary Skills, Non-Weapon Proficiencies (in 1e, 2e and Player's Options versions), 3E Skills, 3.5e Skills, 4E skills... and that's not exhaustive!
Take a character from 1e to 3e. Wow! The changes!
The differences between the editions are real. Not every edition is for you. Probably. (There are people who will happily play any edition without a problem; not everyone is like that).
Cheers!
Sammael
Adventurer
Oh, it's quite far away. At least compared to 3.x. And especially when you consider that 3-4 hits in 4E means at least 3-4 rounds, whereas in 3.x, even at low levels, 3-4 hits could easily be made in a single round, by a single monster with the claw/claw/bit/rend routine.
There is no way for a PC or monster to "drop" quickly in 4E, other than to use a daily power which deals massive amounts of damage (and even then, it will only reduce the grind by 1 or 2 rounds). This is a HUGE difference from all previous editions, which offered multiple ways to end encounters quickly.
- Status
Similar Threads
