If I like 2 editions does that make me doubly dislikeable, Multi-classed, just plain indecisive, or all of the above?
Doubly dislikeable, of course.
I frankly don't CARE what edition others play or like. I've played all but 3.5 and 4- and those because A) it had only been a short while since 3 came out, we were still playing it, and saw no reason to buy upgraded books for the same edition. And then there was the matter of shelves groaning under the weight of 3E material we hadn't even got to yet, lol. and B) The group scattered to the 4 winds again, life happened, and no playing was done at all. So we totally missed 4E. None of us was really interested in the changes that edition brought anyway, so no skin off our teeth.
Pretty much all of them played the same way in our hands. We like a rules lite game, lacking the patience for clunkiness or endless arguments. Thus, annoying or persnickety systems were simply ignored, and each edition just added kewl new stuff, and/or streamlined what was already there. I liked 3E, because the D20 system introduced a unified mechanic that made it much easier to teach the game to new players, and opened the floodgates for new character ideas. Also, the OGL gave all sorts of other talented people the green light to produce content for the game. I also liked B/X, AD&D, and 2E.
Now I'm playing 5E, and loving it, too. Someone took our game, added some way cool twists, removed a LOT of clunk- and made it the official version! I will say that the 3 core books have some of the best art I've seen in a long time.
Whatever you and your group enjoys playing is the "best" edition.
p.s. not having any optimizers, min/maxers, or rules lawyers in our typical games meant that we never suffered many of the problems "the forums" have always shouted about.
