3.5 or 4th edition?
- Thread starter barbarianguy
- Start date
Hussar
Legend
If you guys want to do a test drive of the 4e rules, EnWorld's fabulous guy Olgar Shiverstone has a very nice adventure available for free called: Raiders of Oakhurst Reloaded which should let you know if you like the game or not. It's not, perhaps, 100% rules compliant, but, it's close enough for government work.
AngryMojo
First Post
And $10 to boot. If you're going to make a world, make it a Savage one.
IMHO, in the long run, 4E offers more consistent game, which means that overall, 4E is more likely not to be "unfun". (Note that this doesn't necessarily mean that 4E is more likely to be fun.) 4E is mostly very fair and balanced, and that's a virtue in game design. That said, it's not the only virtue.
There are legitimate (though highly controversial) arguments to be made that 4E ejected too much of whatever constituted the "essence" of D&D. In contrast, very few people currently claim that 3.5E is lacking the same "essence", and while this "essence" is a very nebulous trait, its psychological effect upon the enjoyment of D&D can be profound. Additionally, while 3.5E may not be as fair or consistent as 4E, it is a strong game in its own right, and is also noticeably more fair and consistent than its predecessors.
You can probably surmise that I'm in favour of some kind of synthesis of these systems, in order to combine the best traits of both. It's true; I am in favour of a game with the design philosophy of 4E, but with the "essential" (
) elements of previous editions. Luckily for me, in the two years 4E has been available, it has demonstrably moved in that direction.
As an aside, I speculate that one factor that remains insufficient in 4E is the level of challenge to players. I imagine that if characters (balanced fairly, as they are) were perceived to be in more danger, their survival might seem more heroic and less mechanical.
There are legitimate (though highly controversial) arguments to be made that 4E ejected too much of whatever constituted the "essence" of D&D. In contrast, very few people currently claim that 3.5E is lacking the same "essence", and while this "essence" is a very nebulous trait, its psychological effect upon the enjoyment of D&D can be profound. Additionally, while 3.5E may not be as fair or consistent as 4E, it is a strong game in its own right, and is also noticeably more fair and consistent than its predecessors.
You can probably surmise that I'm in favour of some kind of synthesis of these systems, in order to combine the best traits of both. It's true; I am in favour of a game with the design philosophy of 4E, but with the "essential" (
) elements of previous editions. Luckily for me, in the two years 4E has been available, it has demonstrably moved in that direction.As an aside, I speculate that one factor that remains insufficient in 4E is the level of challenge to players. I imagine that if characters (balanced fairly, as they are) were perceived to be in more danger, their survival might seem more heroic and less mechanical.
"Essence" is quite nebulous...and is also an essential quality of any strong brand. Exhibit One in marketing on this point is New Coke- a product that beat both Coke's original recipe and its competitor Pepsi in taste tests, yet failed miserably in the market due to it "not being Coke" AND "not being Pepsi."
And part of that argument with the 3.5/4Ed debate is that there are many changes that people simply don't like. (My latest addition to that list is 4Ed's Thri-Kreen supposedly having only 2 fully functional arms.)
Neonchameleon
Legend
New Coke also failed because of the way the taste tests were managed - it was only sip tests (in which sweetness is a huge advantage). And no one drinks coke just in sips.
Mark CMG
Creative Mountain Games
If you enjoy Warhammer wargaming, you should also look over Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay. Like D&D, it has gone through a number of rules editions over the 25 years since first being published, so there is a rich tradition of material available (and lots of cheap). Some of the benefits your group might find to using some version of WFRP include already being familiar with the races and backgrounds, being able to go between regular roleplaying and wargaming when clashes between nations might spring up in parts of the campaign world, and being able to pick up inexpensive game books on ebay or in the sale areas of many gamestores. Have fun!
If you know enough about 3.5 to have an obscure race in Races of Stone be your favorite race, you might as well play 3.5.
Agamon
Adventurer
I was going to say...if he knows about Feral Garguns and Races of Stone, maybe the Red Box is unnessesary.
But goliaths and Eberron are in 4e, too. So checking both out isn't a bad thing.
